= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
betterthanwell comments on Do we have it too easy? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (44)
(Note that whole math textbooks can be essentially correct. Minor errors can usually be corrected without affecting anything else.)
While this is true, most math [1] textbooks generally don't provide verbose treatments of controversial, unresolved, possibly untestable meta-problems [2], (where the validity of the conclusions crucially depend on previous controversial, unresolved, possibly untestable meta-problems.)
[1] String theory textbooks provide a possible anti-example.
[2] Metaphysics, metacognition, metaprogramming.
I can assure you that the maths in a string theory textbook will still be essentially correct.