In mathematics adding A to B and adding B to A are the same, I guess. But in life adding raspberry jam to tea and adding tea to raspberry jam are the two different things: I like the first and hate the second.
Adding in mathematics and life
Scholar–practitioner, author, educator, and former ambassador
Alisher Faizullaev 
Sorry for offtopic.
LikeLike
In addition, I have noticed that individuals who are a way better in any given language tend to not consider the mistakes being made by the other while exchanging ideas; perhaps they basically try to understand the other whatever language (I mean the degree of command) s/he speaks or may be they just do not want to hurt or inconvinience the peer, for people react differently , if one sees good in being corrected, the other may see something of negative nature in it. Or may be the point is usually more important than the mean through which it is being expressed. In such a case one might not desire to lose the track of the coversation… And you know what, it is right! if so, is this ‘problem’ sentenced to remain unsolved?
LikeLike
By the way, could you please correct us whenever we make mistakes in using the english language appropriately, even if the mistakes are not significant. It is really important to me, for I believe it is the best way of enhancing one’s command of English.
LikeLike
Well, I am not sure. Theoretically may be you are right but in practice these two things are two different products, I think. Any way, thank you for your opinion.
LikeLike
Ok, then lets try it out in practice: take 2 empty cups, put 20 gramms jam to the 1st cup then add 80ml of tea to it, then take the 2nd cup and pour 80ml of tea into it, then add 20gamms of jam. Then tell us if they are going to be different. I m sure as long as the substances being added are material, the rule of ‘A+B = B+A’ remains universial.
LikeLike
That is good, if we will do this just with using a tea cup – that would work. But on the other hand tea cup is tea cup, and when we use it we always add jam to tea but not vice versa. The other story happens when we add tea to a jam which is in the jam bottle. I am not sure that we will get the same test – again that occurs in (my) practice.
It seems to me that the taste of tea depends not only on tea itself but on cup (chalice) too. Many Uzbeks like drink tea only in “piola”, for example, and they don’t like the taste of tea if they drink it using another piece of drinking equipment.
And a few more words on differences between adding in mathematics and life. I think there are some differences between the following interactions: I am speaking to hear or she is speaking to me, or I am playing with a kid or a kid playing with me. This is not an adding A to B or B to A.
LikeLike
Sorry for being straight, but the things which you are relating to mathematics are not being considered mathematically. Considering “adding tea to a jam which is in the jam bottle”, we will get the same results if the next instructions are followed: for the sake of accuracy of the experiment, empty the jam bottle which is used in the first case, then use it ), pour in your tea (the same amount) first then add the jam which used to be in the jam bottle (the same amount) to the tea.
As for your other examples, they thoroughly represent “A+B = B+A” formulae, you are just pointing at the main object or the object under observation (being studied) in the interaction, what in turn does not change the nature of the interaction.
LikeLike
Interesting. I think my approach is more social where the meaning (of words) plays a big role, and your approach is more mechanical (or mathematical). You know sometimes some young people write on the tree or wall something like “Andrea + Maria = Love”. It seems to me that that is not the same as “Maria + Andrea = Love”. While, again, “A+B” and “B+A” would produce the same result (so here there is no difference in meaning, I mean in the social meaning).
LikeLike
If so, then surely there is no ‘adding’ and there is no ‘maths’ here, there is only ‘life’, and not just life, but the one with its subjective experiences and/or observations.
LikeLike
There is such a word as “intersubjectivity”. In a vide sense every human experience is intersubjective. Even such “objective” phenomenon as money is in fact intersubjective: we buy things for money because we (in society) agree that money has some value. So we live in an intersubjective world where meanings depend on social construction. In this respect even mathematics is intersubjective phenomenon. However, there is a sort of agreement in a society that mathematics (or natural sciences) is more objective thing than, say, psychology (or human relations). That is why we can distinguish adding in mathematics and adding in life (to be more exact: in social life). But again, that is a part of intersubjective reality which is a part of objective reality which is a part of intersubjective reality…
LikeLike
What I said is true, though with one condition, it is: if by ‘speaking’ and ‘playing’ operations the 2 way interaction is meant. However if it is 1 way interaction, where it is assumed that there are both active and inactive objects in the single interaction being studied ( in other words, in the given 2 scenarios (e.g. I and the kid and the kid and me) the act of speaking ( or playing) is made by different objects) the interaction is not supposed to be studied as of “A+B = B+A” rule from the very beginning. Instead the other math theory needs to be applied.
LikeLike
I think we really underestimate the diversity of mathematical concepts. Mathematics is much more than what we learn at our schools. So, for example, there is a difference between a commutative and a not-commutative algebra, which is favored in quantum field and string theories. So if we learn the lows of commutative algebra at school which are actually telling us “a+b=b+a”, the not-commutative once tells us something about strange things from our lives. There is a difference in the geometry, a kind of multifariousness, which makes “a+b ≠ b+a”.. 🙂 May be the cup is the salvation!
LikeLike
After all, mathematics is a part of our life, or vice versa.
LikeLike
Of course.. and we think things are impossible, just because we cannot imagine them, or because there are no solid concepts for their explanation..
LikeLike
Therefore I see no solid ground under your hate. However tastes do not have to be logical, and they are usually not.
LikeLike
One cannot be right theoretically, but not practically. The theory is wrong if the opposite or at least not what is stated in the theory is observed in action.
LikeLike
Actually there will be no difference, if the proportions of the two substances and the rest of the conditions are kept the same.
LikeLike