Which subject is more important: mathematics or language?

eh-he-he. I've always found situations like this amusing. Whoever writes the last long and intelligent post, refuting the opponent's arguments, wins...
Maybe it's for the best.
After all, I've already forgotten what it's like.
And the funniest thing is that it can go on forever, until someone gets bored. And if they back down, it just means the "enemy" simply overwhelmed them with stupid stubbornness...
Oh, well.

Ugh... how rude...

sophistry

And this isn't an attack... ??? ... what's the point of giving you arguments when you don't fully understand the meaning of even old ones - interpreting them in your own way and breaking off my phrases in quotes...

a completely meaningless phrase; I could say the same thing and be right.

You're still taking language (any language) to mean what you learned in school - what nonsense... we're discussing a general concept... a huge system of communication... without which nothing in our human world would develop... besides, there are only two numerical systems, but hundreds of languages and different writing systems...

no, that's not true. since we've fallen into a chain of exaggerations and simplifications, why shouldn't I write that way too?
and what's the point of the last sentence? are we comparing logic and linguistics - "which is cooler"? it seems like nonsense to me. I'm not talking about different notations for numbers... although now everyone is more or less switching to Arabic numerals.

I mean the language of your ancestors that you speak...

is language the spiritual foundation of a nation? or is language not just a tool for communication, thanks to which these foundations can be passed on?
I can reason about the transience of being, but without understanding it, the words themselves won't mean much to me.
and the "language of the ancestors" has undergone terrible metamorphoses, as you well know.

what will you teach your children first... math? won't you wait for their first word? won't you be indifferent to this event? isn't that what matters?

the point is not the word itself, but the very fact of a child saying their first word, right? but this is an incorrect example.

then thousands of people replaced machines, and the rebels who rose up were exterminated... in the last hundred years, many things have been mechanized, and this process is steadily continuing, and every year hundreds of people lose their jobs...

back then, it was a revolution and a breakthrough. given the current situation, I doubt it. at best, it's a gradual adoption of new technologies, like a printer that changes paper... and besides, there's more bureaucracy now than there was then. therefore, the demand for officials is beyond doubt. even if it's not the most creative and interesting job. I myself think that this kind of activity is terribly depressing and boring. but that doesn't diminish the harsh facts.

specialists in foreign languages... they are in high demand for preparing for universities...

exactly. there are few options. either a teacher/tutor, or a rare translator...

oh... build me a model of the world where there are no languages, but there is math... would that be life... but the opposite can be imagined...
the first book in school will still be an alphabet book...

yes. many things in the world are interconnected. sometimes, one cannot exist without the other. but we're not here to prove the "exclusive correctness" of mathematics or language, but rather their greater importance.

and why this disrespect for your father... you're far from being a philosopher... and happiness is not in millions...

are you a philosopher?
and besides, it's not disrespect, but a harsh truth of life. I don't like to be hypocritical. nor do I like to create idols, role models, or elder comrades.
and if the fact that you have a medal doesn't matter to you, why did you mention it? to show off or what did you mean by that?

it's as if humanity wouldn't survive without robots... all these numerous technologies only harm the environment!

cars also harm the environment. and humanity could have survived without them, relying in the 21st century solely on horses. but would that have led to a good outcome?
but it's better to strive forward, isn't it? there is much less good in life than bad. no one said that humanity will never destroy itself.

although if a person has trouble finding rhymes, then they shouldn't write, because a rhyme should come naturally without mechanical selection...

let each person decide for themselves, okay?
and also, pay attention to Lermontov, Nekrasov, Mayakovsky, Byron...
when writing poems, they all painstakingly selected rhymes. the only poet who managed to write "in one sitting" was, strangely enough, Pushkin.
he sometimes managed to do that.
but the mood itself or a single thought that you want to express will not write a poem for you. it's as if "it's the destiny of true masters - rhymes that flow from the pen onto the paper effortlessly," but... this is the tale of a dilettante who considers himself an excellent poet. hard work is needed everywhere. at least, if you want not to follow the spontaneously emerging associations and coincidences, but to express the ideological content as it is, without adapting to conventions.

this is not an article, but a definition...

sophistry
...in general, a wise man once said, "don't feed me with the poison of other people's statements." it's like food that someone else has already eaten. if you want, you can throw around phrases here and there, using a minimum of your own, without bothering to put your judgments into your own form, but that won't contribute to triumph. take note, please.

if you don't see real arguments...

sophistry
I wasn't "inflamed," I just caught the tone of your not-so-kind and respectful tone, and parried in the same way, which, apparently, had some effect.

in my opinion, of us two, only I still believe that both sciences are as important in our time as air...

yes, yes. but you forget about one small detail. as I said, we're not here to discuss harmony and interaction, we're here to prove the greater importance of the item that came up in the lottery. therefore, you can leave the bile and some kind of pretense, pathetic mockery, and so on. it won't benefit you. you talk about the poverty of my arguments, but you don't provide any yourself. you only try to refute mine.
by the way, I understand your attacks - you desperately want to win the argument, but it shouldn't turn into a feud.
if you're interested, I feel the same way about you as before, not badly. because I leave all the nonsense that goes on in discussion topics when I leave them.