Apr 5, 2013

ElegiMenggapai "Axiology of Mathematics"

By Marsigit
Yogyakarta State University

In the contemporary times, the mathematical backbone of its value has been extensively investigated and proven over the past ten years.

According to Dr. Robert S. Hartman’s, value is a phenomena or concept, and the value of anything is determined by the extent to which it meets the intent of its meaning.

Hartman 1 indicated that the value of mathematics has four dimensions: the value of its meaning, the value of its uniqueness, the value of its purpose, and the value of its function.

Further, he suggested that these four “Dimensions of Value” are always referred to as the following concepts: intrinsic value, extrinsic value, and systemic value.

The bare intrinsic and inherent essence of mathematical object 2 is a greater, developed intensity of immediacy.

Mathematical object is genuinely independent either of consciousness or of other things; something for itself.

In and for itself belongs to the Absolute alone, mathematical object can be perceived as the developed result of its nature and as a system of internal relations in which it is independent of external relations.

The important value distinctions like the hierarchy of value of mathematics can be stated that in the simplest instances of combining intrinsic valuation with its extrinsic value, and systemic value of mathematical object.

Here, nothing gets lost, the hierarchy of value is preserved within the domain of intrinsic valuation, and it makes good sense to say that our value of mathematics has more value than the others.

To illustrate the schema 3, let us take to modify Moore’s model of the hierarchy of the valuation of mathematical object as follows:

"IA1 = EA1 = SA1 = A2". “I” stands for all intrinsic value of mathematical object A1, “E” stands for all extrinsic value of mathematical object A1, and “S” stands for all systemic value of mathematical object A1. This formula acknowledges 4 that each of the first three formulas results in a value increase, so we end up with "A2" on the far right. This formula also says that in each case we end up with the same value increase, namely, "A2," and that is precisely the value of mathematics.

By the above method, Moore constructed a value of mathematics that can be used to objectively measure our capacity to make good value decisions.

Unlike all other assessments, this structure allows us to understand 'how' a person thinks and perceives, not what they think, but how they think.

Mathematics valuation explains and measures the thinking that forms the foundation for, and leads to, behavior.

What's even more important is that one strives to value mathematics as objective, independent of any one observer, and accurate regardless of race, religion, socioeconomic conditions, or nationality.

Valuation of mathematics are then applied to the rankings to provide numeric reference to the results.

The individual uniqueness 5 of every human being is evidenced by the fact that there are 6.4 quadrillion possible permutations of these rankings.

In term of the practical sense, one way to value mathematics to the real world might be to introduce additional constants in the first order set theory to refer to things in the real world, and then to instantiate general mathematical theories to apply to these objects.

To value mathematics we have to know something about it.

In term of the systemic value, we way we apply mathematics to the real world is to construct an abstract model of the aspect of reality we are concerned with.

This can be done by introducing appropriate definitions in set theory.

Mathematics can then be applied to the analysis of this model.

The results are then informally translated into conclusions about the real world.

1 ………, 2002, Validity Studies Of The Hartman Profile Model, Ai, Axiometrics International, Inc. Retrieved 2007
2Dagobert D. Runes, 1942, Dictionary of Philosophy. Retrieved 2007
3 Mark A. Moore in Frank G. Forrest's Valuemetricsא: The Science of Personal and Professional Ethics
4 Ibid
5 …….., 2004, The Science of Axiology. Retrieved 2007

No comments:

Post a Comment