I mentioned earlier, there is a discussion between those who consider that mathematics moves in two totally opposite currents, the pure and the applied. In that sense, I wrote for Revista Científica Theories, Approaches and Applications in the Social Sciences in 2011, an article titled "Application or abstractionism", two sides of mathematics, where I express my point of view on this topic.
So I studied some authors who defend one or another position, the case that I bring a collation is that of Godfrey Harold Hardy, who is considered pure mathematician.
The expression corresponding to the title of the next post, picks up the feeling of the British mathematician GH Hardy in 1940, when he writes his essay on the "Apologia of a mathematician"
Godfrey Harold Hardy (also known as GH Hardy, 1877-1947) had gone through a heart attack that affected, and was over 60 years old, felt somewhat depressed, believed that he had lost the creative faculties for Mathematics, creativity that has characterized him as a remarkable mathematician during his time. Since he had made important contributions to mathematics. Among them, the inequality that bears his name "Inequality of Hardy", in 1920.
Under this depressive picture, Hardy expresses in his "Apology of a Mathematician," his contempt for applied mathematics, which he considers ugly and boring; While it highlights the aesthetic qualities of pure mathematics, which it considers beautiful and also independent of all human creation.
He further argues that the work of the mathematician is to demonstrate theorems and develop mathematics, work that depends on the creativity of the mathematician, and that this creativity is in force only when you are young.
Some of the expressions of Hardy in "Apologia of a mathematician"
"Anyone with a talent for mathematics can use and develop it when they are young, while having full creative abilities"
"Mathematics is essentially a creative activity, rather than an explanatory or expository activity"
"Pure mathematics seems to me a rock on which all idealism fails, 317 it is a prime number, but not because we believed it, or because our minds are formed in this way, but because it is, because mathematical reality is constructed in that way "
Source
http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dac/revistateacs/articulos/Rev8-Art1-Leal.pdf
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4735424
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3778423
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apolog%C3%ADa_de_un_matem%C3%A1tico
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Harold_Hardy
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desigualdad_de_Hardy
