Re: Uniform design

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg48392] Re: Uniform design*From*: John Doty <jpd at whispertel.LoseTheH.net>*Date*: Fri, 28 May 2004 00:50:20 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <c8kd99$msp$1@smc.vnet.net> <200405220704.DAA08884@smc.vnet.net> <c8ptuj$kpi$1@smc.vnet.net> <c8vaqp$3u3$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Paul Abbott wrote: > To the contrary, I'm pretty sure that the designers of Mathematica, > principally Stephen Wolfram, did intend Mathematica to be used in the > way Leibniz proposed. I don't think so. Leibniz wanted *foolproof* mathematics. Mathematica is far from foolproof. Wolfram has consistently chosen Newtonian utility over Leibnizian rigor in Mathematica's design and implementation. That's the sense in which Mathematica posesses "uniform design". Of course, utility is a tricky and irregular concept. That's reality for you, always getting in the way of neat ideology. -jpd

**References**:**Re: Uniform design***From:*ab_def@prontomail.com (Maxim)