Slashdot Mirror
'To Live Your Best Life, Do Mathematics' (quantamagazine.org)
Excerpts from an article on Quanta Magazine, rearranged for clarity and space: Math conferences don't usually feature standing ovations, but Francis Su received one last month in Atlanta. In his talk he framed mathematics as a pursuit uniquely suited to the achievement of human flourishing, a concept the ancient Greeks called eudaimonia, or a life composed of all the highest goods. Su talked of five basic human desires that are met through the pursuit of mathematics: play, beauty, truth, justice and love. Su opened his talk with the story of Christopher, an inmate serving a long sentence for armed robbery who had begun to teach himself math from textbooks he had ordered. After seven years in prison, during which he studied algebra, trigonometry, geometry and calculus, he wrote to Su asking for advice on how to continue his work. After Su told this story, he asked the packed ballroom at the Marriott Marquis, his voice breaking: "When you think of who does mathematics, do you think of Christopher?" If mathematics is a medium for human flourishing, it stands to reason that everyone should have a chance to participate in it. But in his talk Su identified what he views as structural barriers in the mathematical community that dictate who gets the opportunity to succeed in the field -- from the requirements attached to graduate school admissions to implicit assumptions about who looks the part of a budding mathematician. When Su finished his talk, the audience rose to its feet and applauded, and many of his fellow mathematicians came up to him afterward to say he had made them cry. [...] Mathematics builds skills that allow people to do things they might otherwise not have been able to do or experience. If I learn mathematics and I become a better thinker, I develop perseverance, because I know what it's like to wrestle with a hard problem, and I develop hopefulness that I will actually solve these problems. And some people experience a kind of transcendent wonder that they're seeing something true about the universe. That's a source of joy and flourishing.
Transcript: https://mathyawp.wordpress.com/2017/01/08/mathematics-for-human-flourishing/
Audio Recording: https://www.dropbox.com/s/55i43l2irm57y9c/01%20Mathematics%20for%20Human%20Flourishing.mp3?dl=0
... since they didn't have the numbers for it. Still their aqueducts lasted centuries and millennia. Nassim Taleb says a side effects mathematics is to optimize and cut corners, making things fragile. He also quoted a science historian that before the 13th century no more than five persons in Europe knew how to perform a division. But their architects made all those cathedrals that are more or less still standing. (They apparently didn't know geometry either: a triangle was visualized as the head of a horse.)
Not saying don't use mathematics, that would be insane, just listing counterexamples to the claim that life is best lived with mathematics. Any boxing in becomes counterproductive at some level.
I think one of the problems with mathematics is that it's pretty hard to get the average person to see it as anything other than a tool. Maybe that's how it's taught, but how do you get average students interested in math the same way mathematicians are? Where is the hook in people's minds that turns them on to it as something other than a bunch of formulas and operations? I know it's a cop-out to say I suck at math, but I really do feel I'm mathematically challenged. I wonder if it was just because I didn't get some magic spark early on. I remember all of my elementary and high school math being a long slog of memorization with very little understanding. I was never very good at it and just learned enough to handle the exams. Like every high school student, I still remember to this day that x = -b +/- (sqrt(b^2 - 4ac)/2a) but I have no idea why that is or what it's good for other than getting the answers to a quadratic equation. I think my lack of math background kept me out of civil or chemical engineering, despite a huge interest in both.
One reason why I think proper teaching may play a role is because I had a similar experience studying chemistry in college. I had a very good introductory chemistry teacher and something just clicked. Almost everyone saw it as a bunch of nonsense formulas and equations for various phenomena that had to be memorized for the exams and forgotten, but somehow I got a little more out of it and it was interesting enough that I got a degree in it. Good thing too -- by the second year of engineering school I knew I wasn't going to be able to keep up with my poor math background and didn't want to end up a generic business major!
Even better with atl-math you can make up you own truths...
What you've just described is not alt-maths, it is in fact actual regular maths.
For example, you can make up your own truth about how 1+1 isn't really 2 and you wind up with Galois theory and finite fields. Or invent something impossible like x*x=-1 and you end up with complex numbers.
Or you can invent absurd things like "infinity" and so find that 1-2+3-4+5-... to infinity ends up rather oddly as 0.25 (don't even look at 1+2+3+4+...).
Mathematics is in fact all about making up the rules and seeing where they lead. There are basically 3 outcomes:
1. trivial (and therefore not interesting).
2. inconsistent (and therefore not interesting).
3. interesting.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
The problem with test scores is that they don't mean shit except that you have either been an ass-kiss student who was used by a professor,
For the literature teacher who wants you to exalt their favorite author or the history/civics teacher who will give you a higher grade for parroting their political point of view, you might have a point.
One of the better points of science and math is that it's not quite as subject to that sort of kiss-assery. When you answer "What's 2+2" with the number 4, your teacher can't dock you points because they don't like the way you wrote the 4.
That's just... bullshit.
Is walking "accessible to anyone who really tries"? What if they have no legs?
Lots of people simply do not have the intellectual facilities -- not training, I'm talking about capacity here -- to even begin to approach mathematics beyond various levels. Every person is a mix of capacities and limits. To claim that undertaking X is accessible to any person who "really tries" demonstrates nothing more than that the claimant has very little understanding of people in general.
Or to look at it from the other end of the stick, you're not going to become Einstein just because you "really try."
We're not identical cupcakes spewed out by a cupcake factory, some of us missing the icing just because we went down a different conveyor belt.
Not yet, anyway.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I'm pretty good at math but I find it boring. I enjoy programming which is similar but for whatever reason I find it a lot more interesting
Me too. I think the big difference is the lack of feedback in math. If I work for hours or days to construct a proof, I don't really know if it is valid or not, and maybe it was all a waste of time because I made an error in the first few steps. With programming, I can test incrementally, fix errors as I go, and I can see the end result is valid because the program works. The feeling of accomplishment is much better.
Also, programming pays better.