3 ms·

But the inconsistency still exists regardless of the historical etymology. Math is not a science. A mathematician is Not a scientist. Why is computing a scienc

But the inconsistency still exists regardless of the historical etymology. Math is not a science. A mathematician is Not a scientist. Why is computing a science?

User23 5y ago
Logic, Ethics, and Aesthetics are the three normative sciences. Mathematics falls comfortably within the domain of logic, and thus mathematics is a scientific enterprise. Computing science is the subset of the subset that deals with getting actual computable results.
- neonological 5y ago
  Did you just group Logic and aesthetics together into one thing? Beauty and ethics are subjective. Logic is not. Either way following this definition of "normative science" neither logic nor computer science nor math goes under it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_science The reason is because this definition mentions the notion of preferred outcome. Logic and Math and computer science do not deal with "preferred outcomes" these fields are all just axioms and the consequences resulting from said axioms preferred or not. Pedantry aside, nobody considers a "mathematician" to be a "scientist" when using the terms as they are commonly used in English. This is a total inconsistency.
  - User23 5y ago
    I’m using Peirce’s definition of the normative sciences[1]. As is not uncommon in English, the same words or phrases can denote different concepts and the wiki link you shared is a case in point. [1] https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce
    - neonological 5y ago
      Feels arbitrary. You don't group oil painting with mechanical engineering why group Math with Beauty? This isko organization... if they do indeed follow pierce is incredibly strange. Case in point: https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce1.jpg https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce1.jpg Philosophy is under mathematics which is not under logic? Philosophy is like literature it is entirely a separate category and logic isn't even mentioned in his arbitrary grouping.
adrusi 5y ago
Well I'm not sure when the common usage of "science" changed, but it's possible that when "computer science" was coined in the 1950s [1], the older usage was still at least widely understood. Perhaps given the present day importance of the discipline that's stuck with an outdated name, we can return the the older usage which is IMO better. [1] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=computer+science&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccomputer%20science%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=computer+scien...
- neonological 5y ago
  I'm curious how did mathematics miss out on the word "science." The meaning of the word "scientist" is consistent with how it's not ascribed to a mathematician as mathematicians don't do anything related to the scientific method. The thing is you stated that around this time the term "science" was more broad and just meant acquiring knowledge... how come "science" wasn't applied to mathematicians? Technically, according to what you stated, the definition was broad enough to apply to mathematicians.

But the inconsistency still exists regardless of the historical etymology. Math is not a science. A mathematician is Not a scientist. Why is computing a science?

User23 5y ago

Logic, Ethics, and Aesthetics are the three normative sciences. Mathematics falls comfortably within the domain of logic, and thus mathematics is a scientific enterprise. Computing science is the subset of the subset that deals with getting actual computable results.

neonological 5y ago
Did you just group Logic and aesthetics together into one thing? Beauty and ethics are subjective. Logic is not. Either way following this definition of "normative science" neither logic nor computer science nor math goes under it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_science The reason is because this definition mentions the notion of preferred outcome. Logic and Math and computer science do not deal with "preferred outcomes" these fields are all just axioms and the consequences resulting from said axioms preferred or not. Pedantry aside, nobody considers a "mathematician" to be a "scientist" when using the terms as they are commonly used in English. This is a total inconsistency.
- User23 5y ago
  I’m using Peirce’s definition of the normative sciences[1]. As is not uncommon in English, the same words or phrases can denote different concepts and the wiki link you shared is a case in point. [1] https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce
  - neonological 5y ago
    Feels arbitrary. You don't group oil painting with mechanical engineering why group Math with Beauty? This isko organization... if they do indeed follow pierce is incredibly strange. Case in point: https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce1.jpg https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce1.jpg Philosophy is under mathematics which is not under logic? Philosophy is like literature it is entirely a separate category and logic isn't even mentioned in his arbitrary grouping.

adrusi 5y ago

Well I'm not sure when the common usage of "science" changed, but it's possible that when "computer science" was coined in the 1950s [1], the older usage was still at least widely understood. Perhaps given the present day importance of the discipline that's stuck with an outdated name, we can return the the older usage which is IMO better. [1] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=computer+science&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccomputer%20science%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=computer+scien...

neonological 5y ago
I'm curious how did mathematics miss out on the word "science." The meaning of the word "scientist" is consistent with how it's not ascribed to a mathematician as mathematicians don't do anything related to the scientific method. The thing is you stated that around this time the term "science" was more broad and just meant acquiring knowledge... how come "science" wasn't applied to mathematicians? Technically, according to what you stated, the definition was broad enough to apply to mathematicians.