[FOM] rest in peace: re Harvey's message of April 16th.

[Gabriel Stolzenberg]

   I've just looked at Harvey's message of April 16th and am pleased
to find no new attempt to pursue our disagreement.  More important, so
long as Harvey continues to have great confidence in his view of the
matter, it makes perfect sense for him to pursue the program on which
it is, in part, based.

   I got involved only because Harvey seemed to have an impression of
the interests of number theorists that I thought he might, later on,
find to be simplistic.  But I see now that this concern was unfounded.
What I find simplistic, he clearly does not.

   For what it is worth, I'm content to talk with Deep Thought when I
want to learn more about these matters.  And, when it's relevant, to
rely on my own experience.  I'm also content to rely on it in judging
what is and is not of interest for constructive math.

   When I do, my own experience tells me that, until the mindsets
are recognized and their significance is appreciated, classical
mathematicians will treat constructive math as something that it
is not, having interests that it has not.  And, like David Hilbert,
whose interest in constructive math was utterly destructive, they
will be confident that they are getting it right.

   Finally, as for my exchange with Harvey, may it rest in peace.

      Gabriel