設萬維讀者為首頁 廣告服務 技術服務 聯繫我們 關於萬維
簡體 繁體 手機版
分類廣告
版主:諍友
萬維讀者網 > 教育學術 > 跟帖
重寫
送交者: littelfat 2009月04月22日07:10:37 於 [教育學術] 發送悄悄話
回  答: 樓下給定理君的回貼供你和並瓦參考。littelfat 於 2009-04-22 07:06:52
What is is at debate is not whether the Chinese language is capable of symbolic or formal derivations. To that end, any language systems can potentially introduce a set of symbols, if needs be. And the symbols can simply be the characters from the very same language. As a matter of fact, I believe that, by now, under the heavy influence of western cultures, all major forms of human languages have been made to connect with symbolic reasoning using symbolic tools as part of their "own" languages.

But so what ?

The fact is: the very form and format of the Chinese language is not conducive to generating the symbolic language spontaneously and automatically on its own.

I think history has clearly demonstarted that. The very fact that you are using partial
symbolic language only after (not before) you have been educated within the western cultural system (be it math, science or whatever) only serves to attest the truth of that statement.
0%(0)
0%(0)
標  題 (必選項):
內  容 (選填項):
實用資訊
回國機票$360起 | 商務艙省$200 | 全球最佳航空公司出爐:海航獲五星
海外華人福利!在線看陳建斌《三叉戟》熱血歸回 豪情築夢 高清免費看 無地區限制
一周點擊熱帖 更多>>
一周回復熱帖
歷史上的今天:回復熱帖
2005: 韓露: 蘇格蘭小鎮尋書記
2005: 郭影: 留學西班牙還是韓國?
2004: 清華理科現狀
2004: 中國科學界的急功近利