https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Allenzexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2026-04-10T04:19:11ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:435:_Purity&diff=45977Talk:435: Purity2013-08-07T02:22:20Z<p>Allenz: </p>
<hr />
<div>See Comte's hierarchy of the sciences from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_three_stages his law of three stages]: Mathematics; Astronomy; Physics; Chemistry; Biology; Psychology; Sociology. --[[Special:Contributions/24.85.241.128|24.85.241.128]] 07:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Shame it leaves out Engineering running parellel to all of them - maybe Engineering is just too busy getting shit done? {{unsigned|2.121.172.39}}<br />
<br />
- What can we learn from this? - Actually as an Engineer I have a different view point to 2.121.172.39. We are implementers of original ideas and a few of us are lucky to be original idea generators. As a successful full time Engineer I still find time to be a philosopher and aspiring teacher (who simply didn't want to be poor, which is hard to do when specializing in the other two professions). How ever I do keep asking myself often who wrote the laws that mathematicians and theoretical scientists keep re-discovering for us... - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 17:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"[http://robotics.cs.tamu.edu/dshell/cs689/papers/anderson72more_is_different.pdf More is Different]", written by Nobel laureate P.W. Anderson, is an insightful critique of constructivism. Quote:<br />
<blockquote>But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y." At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one.</blockquote><br />
[[User:Allenz|Allenz]] ([[User talk:Allenz|talk]]) 02:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)</div>Allenzhttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:435:_Purity&diff=45976Talk:435: Purity2013-08-07T02:20:43Z<p>Allenz: </p>
<hr />
<div>See Comte's hierarchy of the sciences from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_three_stages his law of three stages]: Mathematics; Astronomy; Physics; Chemistry; Biology; Psychology; Sociology. --[[Special:Contributions/24.85.241.128|24.85.241.128]] 07:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Shame it leaves out Engineering running parellel to all of them - maybe Engineering is just too busy getting shit done? {{unsigned|2.121.172.39}}<br />
<br />
- What can we learn from this? - Actually as an Engineer I have a different view point to 2.121.172.39. We are implementers of original ideas and a few of us are lucky to be original idea generators. As a successful full time Engineer I still find time to be a philosopher and aspiring teacher (who simply didn't want to be poor, which is hard to do when specializing in the other two professions). How ever I do keep asking myself often who wrote the laws that mathematicians and theoretical scientists keep re-discovering for us... - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 17:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"More is Different", written by Nobel laureate P.W. Anderson, is an insightful critique of constructivism. Quote:<br />
<blockquote>But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y." At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one.</blockquote><br />
[[User:Allenz|Allenz]] ([[User talk:Allenz|talk]]) 02:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)</div>Allenz