Portuguese and math share common features as languages, such as the ability to be used to make different kinds of predictions. Mathematical description seems more appropriate to quantitative information, while Portuguese may have higher qualitative expressions.

However, mathematics is a language that contains many sub-languages that have connections with each other: geometry, algebra, topology, etc. Therefore, mathematics offers a much broader and inhomogeneous description as a collection of sublanguages.

Thus, the mathematical description consists of complex narratives much broader than the descriptions restricted to the language of Portuguese.

When we use mathematics as a language to describe a process, we first of all create a rich stock of possible mathematical narratives, regardless of which ones fit well with objects in the natural world.

However, the role of form in mathematics is extremely suggestive.

The basic strategy is that by looking at how expressions, equations, and diagrams are written and represented and appear in the course of mathematical imagination, we are able to identify new imaginations.

A representation like this figure can describe causal or unrelated relationships between unobservable (latent) variables F1 and F2, measured by observable indicators I*j*. *Structural Equation Models* (SEM's) are mathematical-statistical models used to assess whether theoretical models are plausible when compared to “observed” data. SEM's are very general so that, for example, regression analysis and factor analysis are both precisely their particular cases.

A theory in the social sciences tends to be very rich and complex, where multiple outcomes are seen as consequences of multiple factors interacting in chains of mediation. Standard regression analysis cannot represent such theories in a single model, forcing the researcher to evaluate only partial or very restricted models. The SEMs, in turn, allow us to represent a complex theory in a single and integrated model.

SEMs allow researchers to seriously consider hypothetical construct modeling problems. Although sometimes unrecognized as such, many of the phenomena of interest in the social sciences are not directly observable, even in principle, but are rather hypothetical constructs, intellectual devices that are used to categorize and give meaning to observed phenomena. Examples include social capital, authoritarianism, cartels and social classes. SEM's allow researchers to represent these hypothetical constructs explicitly and distinguish the measurement of a construct from the relationships between the constructs.

Therefore, the role of mathematics in the social sciences seems to be essentially dependent on the possibility of using mathematical symbols as figures.

Similarly, the generation of "alphabets" in mathematics is itself a very creative process, and often suggest the kinds of imaginations we can produce with them.

For example, the SEM's alphabet with its latent, manifest, disturbing variables, and its relationship arrows, suggests certain types of causality in the social sciences.

The MJVI, as a strategy in the game of Being, imagines that living matter cannot interrupt the life impulse that would have probably followed an impulse generated by an instability of "NOTHING."

Even because, inspired by Sigmund Freud, he imagines an irresistible incentive for the Being of life that is nothing more than a Pleasure Principle, overwhelmingly pressing matter to become information, or more precisely, imaginations. The pressure results in the mystery of imagining and imagining, thus paving the way for the crucial imagination, the greatest desire of self-awareness to exist.

“Corporeal” pleasures and displeasures are not convincing enough for the MJVI to include in its strategies in the game of Being the imagination that the goal of this game could be eternal existence.

Above all, he does not forget Descartes' subtle imagination of the hyperbolic doubt to discover, finally, masterfully, that 'I think'.

The MJVI, however, modestly stands in the most prudent position of “I imagine, only”!

Back to columns

<