Rational vs Hutchinsonian - What's the difference?
rational | hutchinsonian |
Capable of reasoning.
*
Logically sound; not contradictory or otherwise absurd.
(label) Healthy or balanced intellectually; exhibiting reasonableness.
*{{quote-magazine, date=2014-06-21, volume=411, issue=8892, magazine=(The Economist)
, title= Of a number, capable of being expressed as the ratio of two integers.
Of an algebraic expression, capable of being expressed as the ratio of two polynomials.
(label) Expressing the type, structure, relations, and reactions of a compound; graphic; said of formulae.
(mathematics) A rational number: a number that can be expressed as the quotient of two integers.
A rational being.
Of or pertaining to (1674–1737), English theological writer, who claimed that the Bible contained the elements of all rational philosophy.
As adjectives the difference between rational and hutchinsonian
is that rational is capable of reasoning while hutchinsonian is of or pertaining to (1674–1737), english theological writer, who claimed that the bible contained the elements of all rational philosophy.As nouns the difference between rational and hutchinsonian
is that rational is (mathematics) a rational number: a number that can be expressed as the quotient of two integers while hutchinsonian is a follower of john hutchinson.rational
English
Alternative forms
* rationall (obsolete)Etymology 1
From (etyl) rationel, rational, from (etyl)Adjective
(en adjective)Magician’s brain, passage=The [Isaac] Newton that emerges from the [unpublished] manuscripts is far from the popular image of a rational practitioner of cold and pure reason. The architect of modern science was himself not very modern. He was obsessed with alchemy.}}
- ¾ is a rational number, but ?2 is an irrational number.
Antonyms
* (reasonable) absurd, irrational, nonsensical * (capable of reasoning) arational, irrational, non-rational * (number theory) irrationalEtymology 2
From (etyl) rational, from , for which see the first etymology.Noun
(en noun)- The quotient of two rationals''' is again a '''rational .
- (Young)