2 ms·
I am surprised to see so many classic mathematical and scientific books and papers, most from before the 20th century. Modern math and science courses do not
by jonjacky 4y ago
I am surprised to see so many classic mathematical and scientific books and papers, most from before the 20th century. Modern math and science courses do not teach from these original sources. I have looked at only a few of these and found them much harder to understand than the modern treatments -- the notation is obsolete and obscure, and the arguments and presentation are often more convoluted and harder to follow.
Can any St John's alums tell us about their experiences with the science and math selections in the curriculum? How did the instructors present them - did they really get into depth with the technical content or just focus on their literary properties and historic background? Were there problem sets where you were asked to infer or calculate the consequences of this material? Do you feel you really understand electromagnetic fields, relativity etc. etc. as a result of studying these?
- pyuser583 4y agoI don’t feel I understand physics from reading Newton any more than I understand philosophy from reading Plato or Literature from reading Homer. If you study any of these subjects in a normal college, you’ll learn about the actual subjects in progressive depth. At most great books schools, the “subject” is the intellectual tradition as a whole - that’s the only thing you study in progressive (it non-linear) depth.