[Buddha-l] Non-arising

[David Andrews]

Hello Bernhard,

Thanks for the reference.

My son graduated in mathematical physics a couple of years ago. My
knowledge comes primarily from discussions with him, although I had a
course in differential topology many years ago. I worked for over a
decade on the applications of formal mathematics to the specification
and verification of computer software. Part of that work involved
explicit but informal mappings between the specifications and observable
events. The specifications were, for the most part, formalized in
Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with choice, with the axiom schema
formalized as definition principles (the EVES system).

I have a strong interest in formal mathematics but my position is
probably closer to mathematical Platonism.

I have been interested in Buddhism since the late 1960s.

David.

On 02/03/2010 6:09 AM, M.B. Schiekel wrote:
> Am 02.03.2010 05:43, schrieb David Andrews:
>    
>> It would helpful if you could provide me some references to the
>> literature. My specific interest would be the comparative analysis of
>> historical treatments of so-called Buddhist logic and modern treatments
>> of logic in a more general sense of the term.
>>      
>
> Hello David.
>
> though an older article, I found this one helpful:
>
> Richard R. Robinson: Some Logical Aspects of Nâgârjuna's System.
> http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/richard2.htm
> Philosophy East&  West, Volumn 6, no.4 (October 1957), P.291-308.
>
> kind regards,
> bernhard
>
>
> PS: as a mathematical physicist I would like to distinguish between
> mathematics as formal systems and other natural sciences like physics,
> that try to construct approximate maps from these mathematical
> structures (models) to physical structures (physical reality).
>
>