tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post5241293214072969773..comments2024-03-28T13:40:26.497+00:00Comments on M-Phi: Easy as 1, 2, 3 ? -- Wittgenstein on countingJeffrey Ketlandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01753975411670884721noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-60262258955432616512020-06-04T00:04:50.815+01:002020-06-04T00:04:50.815+01:00Needs a source! Where did you find this?Needs a source! Where did you find this?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05672718646637803189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-36903170620284197032018-01-18T12:51:17.045+00:002018-01-18T12:51:17.045+00:00Not sure if that's quite right, see the quote ...Not sure if that's quite right, see the quote from Wittgenstein in the page of the book linked below for instance. I've only found this blog post and that excerpt as sources on this particular phrasing of the quote so who's to say.<br /><br />https://books.google.com/books?id=J83Ihn4VcyIC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89AGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966369615475405007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-39483106770017827822016-08-17T02:07:36.762+01:002016-08-17T02:07:36.762+01:00Your accounting solving meth very up-to-date i rea...Your accounting solving meth very up-to-date i read his all solving method thanks for share it <a href="http://www.personalstatementexample.net/best-personal-statement-accounting-example/" rel="nofollow">personal statement accounting</a> .Allen jeleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10312119051975318074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-22958872923805690102016-01-08T19:41:10.583+00:002016-01-08T19:41:10.583+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Allen jeleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10312119051975318074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-2933388493608576892015-10-22T04:52:54.574+01:002015-10-22T04:52:54.574+01:00I can't believe I found this just now! I'v...I can't believe I found this just now! I've recently been thinking heavily about what counting really is, and found it disturbing that a statement such as "2+2 = 4" in the everyday sense (outside of some kind of formal arithmetic) is really not as "innate" or precisely meaningful as I thought it would be. It seems that it is a kind of encapsulating "name" for a learned process that I can't really describe. Maybe I'm confusing myself over nothing, I'm not so sure. Perhaps you have some sort of insight/references on this? Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14387708958959265512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-65188240906118723592015-10-04T22:12:28.544+01:002015-10-04T22:12:28.544+01:00Having a child in the process of becoming numerate...Having a child in the process of becoming numerate/literate, I've been struck by the correlation (as I see it) between the necessity of teaching a child how to count objects without duplication (usually by teaching them to count in an ordered fashion, e.g., back and forth in lines) and the necessity of teaching a child to string letters in a similarly ordered fashion. Gwen loves taking dictation -- she'll name me a word and I'll spell it for her to write down, but she for the most part lacks a sense of writing them in a line, left to right. Writing a line has been developing; she's pretty good at that. But often she'll write left to right until she reaches the edge of the page, and then start the next line right to left!<br /><br />The idea that the sequential ordering of things is relevant to the information that they carry seems to be the (for her, at least) the primary barrier between not reading and reading. She knows all her letters, she knows all the sounds they make, she knows that words can be turned into letters and written down, but the step from turning written letters back into sounds hasn't happened yet, in part because I don't think she's grasped the importance of doing it in a linear fashion, in a particular order.Sara L. Uckelmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14716054827293611237noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-74351135002256219992015-09-28T12:57:18.189+01:002015-09-28T12:57:18.189+01:00Exactly! And this is because raindrops do not have...Exactly! And this is because raindrops do not have the required metaphysical properties to be something one can count: they merge, they multiply, and they don't have proper individuating conditions.Catarinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03277956118114314573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4987609114415205593.post-56130457414405268672015-09-28T11:59:25.034+01:002015-09-28T11:59:25.034+01:00In this connection I very much like Wittgenstein&#...In this connection I very much like Wittgenstein's discussion of counting raindrops. He says, "It is like saying of falling raindrops, `Our vision is so inadequate that we cannot say how many raindrops we saw, though surely we did see a specific number.' The fact is that it makes no sense to talk of the number of drops we saw."gowershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312457281302462824noreply@blogger.com