| ^ I agree with your conclusion, but not your reasoning.
The argument is that Engineers ought to understand the proofs behind all the math that they apply. That is, they should not understand specific details without the foundations of those details.
What you are attributing to this argument is that Math majors then need to understand the applications of the principals they are studying. This is precisely the reverse of what was suggested, and that does not make it equivalent.
I can read Milton, therefore I can read != I can read, therefore I can read Milton.
Nonetheless, I ultimately agree with you, but on the more economic grounds of specialization. |