Chekhov's Mistress

On Not Becoming an Economist

by Bud Parr

I had lunch today with a friend at the Afghan Kabob House on 9th Avenue. Over our korma we talked about, among other things, the magazine n+1 that I had just written about the day before. Mostly we talked about the name, n+1 and what it meant mathematically. I had put in my piece that the title evoked memories of my calculus classes, but my friend said that it reminded him of his stats classes, “n” being the designation of a population. Now I can’t remember, is “n” a population, or a sample?



I said that “n+1” seemed, visually at least, as a superscript, with n designating a number to be determined, or something like that. Then of course, I think n+1 is used in the calculation of interest as well; isn’t it?



The point is that I can’t remember. I can’t remember and it wasn’t that long ago that I took an obnoxiously large number of stats and calculus (oriented) courses in getting my master’s degree in economics. I think it was those classes that convinced me to not become an economist. I suppose like dog people and cat people, there are math people and word people. I’ve managed to straddle a bit of both in my career, but I know firmly where I belong. 



Elsewhere, Scott Esposito at Conversational Reading says in regards to my “In Praise of the Sublimely Unhip” piece that I “really rock” when I give myself some space. Thanks Scott.



Lastly, I’m following the interactive writer/author post on Stanley Crouch at the famous Beatrice with interest. It brings up some interesting questions about identity and credibility on the web, a topic that I’ve been thinking about lately and will be writing about on my other site (to be revealed) soon.



Read widely, think well, and write often.

posted October 08, 2004

comments

Bud, I’ve been following the Beatrice rumble without really knowing why. I sense your intrigue is based on the mystery of the original email-was it real or fake? My interest is far more base and reprehensible, rubbernecking at an accident scene.

    – David Thayer (10/11  at  11:27 AM)


Yes, I don’t mean to sound high-minded, but I was thinking in terms of credibility when you (in this case, S. Crouch) could be anyone. I once received an email from a writer about whom I wrote and of course, it was an aol address. I somehow managed to track it down to a message board that cross-referenced the writer, but that seems a bit extreme.

But, I am also interested in the dialogue that bloggers manage to have at times with print writers/journalists. I suppose too, I’m just a rubbernecker in sum.

    – Bud Parr (CM) (10/13  at  11:23 AM)


Found you through devious web surveillance technology and wanted to thank you for mentioning our nascent journal. Your sense of our editorial mission is spot on and well put. To clear up the title: n+1 is actually borrowed from set theory or really just basic algebra. For any n, whatever n is, a step is added, plus one. It’s meant to evoke an infinite series, an idea of intellectual and human expansion in an age when only technology seems to be allowed to advance. It’s math as metaphor, so no Alan Sokal police for us, please.

    – n+1 (10/13  at  02:08 PM)


Page 1 of 1 pages of comments

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

This site employs rank-denial and other anti-spam measures.
Your link here will do nothing for your rankings or traffic. Off-topic comments will be deleted.




Next entry: Still Crazy After All these Days
Previous entry: In Praise of the Sublimely Unhip

« Back to main

About this Post




Barack Obama Logo