Chances are that when you think about math you don't think of it in anything like the way that Jordan Ellenberg does. Ellenberg is a rare scholar who is both a math professor (at the University of Wisconsin-Madison) and a novelist. And in his fascinating new book, How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking , he deploys analyses of poetry, politics, and even religion in a bold recasting of what math is in the first place.
For Ellenberg, all the stuff you hated about math in high school isn't the core of the thing. He's emphatic that mathematics isn't simply about the calculations involving, you know, numbers; rather, it's a highly nuanced approach to solving problems that we all, unavoidably, encounter.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @11:13AM
Many people dislike say maths at school but the real reason is usually the teacher who is either incompetent or imbecile. Of course maths isn't abstract and discrete from the rest of life. Nobody (well almost nobody) does math for fun but instead because it's how we solve our problems, simple and complex, everyday and theoretical.
I think it was a nice read although I hated the link to the sweat shop Amazon.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by q.kontinuum on Monday June 23 2014, @11:55AM
I disagree, for at least three reasons.
You could have searched for the title to get some reviews on the book, e.g. at the washington post [washingtonpost.com]
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @02:24PM
> Some people just don't like logic or math because it disturbs their wishful thinking
And some people just don't like logic because it gets in the way of their elaborate superiority fantasies.
The idea that kids are choosing to do poorly at maths because it conflicts with wishful thinking is like saying fat people do poorly at biology and chemistry because they are in denial about their weight.
(Score: 1) by q.kontinuum on Monday June 23 2014, @02:40PM
First of all, I didn't say they chose to do poorly at math, I said they might not like it because of wishful thinking. Just as I didn't say they chose to embrace wishful thinking. Actually most people will deny any allegation they'd embrace it, because they often won't realize it themselves.
Second, your analogy is a bit off. It's more like fat people continuing to eat and drink high caloric foods because they like it more than dealing with healthy food ('trueth/logic' in the analogy), which would help them in the long run. And just by observing the trolleys and their owners in supermarkets, or the customers at fast food chains, I can say this pattern is not all that uncommon. (Note I do not generalize for all fat people here, just noting the correlation between unhealthy food in shopping carts and the physical disposition of their owners.)
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @02:58PM
> First of all, I didn't say they chose to do poorly at math,
Potato Potato
> Second, your analogy is a bit off.
No, it was spot on. You just wish it was off because it conflicts with your ridiculous beliefs, so you turned into something that confirms yet another stupid idea. Which is quite ironic given that TFA was all about how that sort of linear thinking is a kind of innumeracy.
(Score: 1) by q.kontinuum on Monday June 23 2014, @03:15PM
With such an eloquent rebuttal I see no choice but to surrender.
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @04:28PM
Different vegetable, same logic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato#Pronunciation [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 1) by Twike on Tuesday June 24 2014, @02:53AM
Just a point of order, preference ("don't like") and performance ("do well/poorly") are not the same thing. There seems to be a relationship where preference does affect performance, it is not as clear as you are indicating. Positive preference will result in a larger amount of time spent practising/learning, however other motivations can cause the same effect. It seems that the practising is directly related with improved performance, however there are other factors to consider.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday June 23 2014, @02:31PM
Perhaps even people who may be interested in math are turned off by math classes because they're tedious as fuck.
Things might be different now, but when I was taking arithmetic as a kid all the way through Calculus/Analytic geometry in college, a relatively small amount of problems were actually interesting word problems which had relevance to the real world. Most were doing math for math's own sake, long nested problems requiring every rule and technique up to that point, which made no sense in the real-world, and a shit-ton of them to boot. Teachers who force people to memorize and/or derive the trig identities are downright sadists.
It was the worst kind of grind imaginable in that the challenge wasn't knowing and applying the rules, but making it through the millions of tedious intermediate steps of long problems without fucking up.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by q.kontinuum on Monday June 23 2014, @03:10PM
I fully agree there are some terrible math teachers around. I just found the original post a bit too generalizing. About your specific experience: Depending on the audience of the course, the teacher probably was terrible; but for some purely technical audiences these kind of tasks might be seen as enjoyable. (Still, I think the teacher should have taken the time to show some practical applications for the tasks.)
My teacher did a better job and even allowed me to use a computer to do most of my homework, even to print it rather than copy it in handwriting - provided, I write the software myself (in Turbo Pascal at that time; it was around '84), show him the source code, and explain, how the source code works. Thus he made sure I understood the mathematical rules and the same time gave me some incentive to learn programming :-)
Still there were several class-mates who didn't like math and would have expected him to follow some entirely different approach.
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khakipuce on Monday June 23 2014, @12:05PM
My daughter loves dance and hates Maths. She hates it because she simply does not get it at even the simplest level but is forced to do maths that she will never, ever, ever, ever^ever use in her life.
I do not get dance. I go to her dance shows but only as a dutiful parent. I simply do not get dance, just why? Why are they doing this on a stage? Why is moving about to music an art form? What is it telling me? It's not that I don't get art, I have a wide taste in music, often visit galleries to view art, particularly abstract art.
Conclusion: people are different (big w00t). I agree with the guy's premise that maths is more than calculating numbers but for some people no amount of trying to make it accessibly will help. And maths simply is not the answer to every situation, you can no doubt apply maths to a Mark Rothko painting but it really will not aid your understanding of the human condition.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Immerman on Monday June 23 2014, @01:23PM
If she ever has to balance a checkbook, comparison shop, paint a wall, make a investment, take out a mortgage, etc. She'll benefit from practically everything covered in the non-accelerated high school math courses. Well maybe not trigonometry so much, statistics would probably be a far better course for high school. *Everyone* can benefit from statistics, it's probably the most widely applicable yet misunderstood branch of mathematics in the world. And every politician on the planet deeply appreciates the fact that you don't understand it so that they can tell preposterous lies to your face and have you believe it.
(Score: 1) by siwelwerd on Monday June 23 2014, @03:45PM
I use trigonometry all the time at home in various woodworking and carpentry home improvement projects. i agree that the mass misunderstanding of statistics is a huge problem for our society though.
(Score: 2) by khakipuce on Tuesday June 24 2014, @08:41AM
Paint a wall? I suppose you are thinking about working out how much paint. But guess what, most people just use experience for that since paint comes in fixed size tins and things like surface roughness, coverage etc, vary.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @02:31PM
Dance is math. The music is cycles and ratios while the movements are geometry and beautiful calculus. If your daughter had someone who could help her make that connection, to reveal the math in what she loves, [google.com] she'd have a chance to completely change her mind about math.
(Score: 2) by khakipuce on Tuesday June 24 2014, @08:49AM
I just knew someone would make a comment like this. I'm guessing you do not have a teenage daughter.
Dance is not maths. Maths can be applied to dance but that is like using words to describe a picture, it is just a description of the thing, not the thing itself. I could also say dance is chemistry, dance is biomechanics and you could say "all those are maths". But of course the maths just describes some facets of those things. Only accountants and mathematicians think everything can be abstracted down to numbers ;-)
(Score: 1) by jmc23 on Monday June 23 2014, @03:29PM
People aren't different. They're just missing different puzzle pieces.
If you don't understand dance, it's because your body is broken and doesn't move. It takes two to tango and you are but half a man. Your daughter can show you what you're missing and you can do likewise. Learn the rhythms and ratios of dance. How do these ratios feel? How many permutations of rhythms given two feet? Toe, heel, flat? How many beats to reach the other side? How many degrees rotation total? How many degrees turn per beat? Partner dance is all about learning translation and arm math. You might start to realize that playing with gravity in rhythmic fashion is actually fun and intellectually stimulating at the same time.
(Score: 1) by Twike on Tuesday June 24 2014, @03:26AM
I have some female friends(adults, with children and husbands) who are into dance. I have gone to some of their recitals. I agree that it doesn't seem too much like art, but I find thinking of it as the art of the choreographer helps me understand it a bit. I admit I have 3 left feet when I try to dance, especially anything that doesn't have a basic pattern that "should" be followed. I don't particularly enjoy watching dance, but I think there's a greater appreciation that you might get if your daughter sticks with it and you get bound-up in the process of creation and refining the show.
I also have joined a singing group, the Appleton MacDowell Male Chorus based in Appleton, Wisconsin, USA. If you have not been up on stage, in front of a crowd, performing, then I highly recommend it as an experience everyone should have. The vocal pieces we put on can be considered a combined piece of art, where the artist is both the composer and the conductor. I don't expect many people to "get" what we do, outside of the non-related audience, as there is a large part of personal improvement, part hobby, part social activity that moves it beyond "just standing there, singing". I expect there is a similar camaraderie amongst the dance class/troop, which is not readily seen from the perspective of the audience. I have NEVER felt connected to other classmates in school(middle, high, or college), in any class, the same way I feel friendship/connection to fellow MacDowell members.
I agree that people are different(and it IS a big deal, it needs to be kept in mind to ensure tolerance for those who are different), and I hope my explanation of my experience singing can help with a possible different perspective on dance.
Conclusion: Yes people are different, and so are expressions of that difference. I agree that math should be more than calculating numbers, and that math will not solve everything. I differ by thinking that schools do need to try to work to get people to understand even if it means using unconventional solutions.
Gratuitous semi-related youtube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fan6ggvh4U [youtube.com] and a classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNQlfDG-EGg [youtube.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Monday June 23 2014, @11:45AM
Oblig XKCD: http://xkcd.com/55/ [xkcd.com]
Yeah I'm karma whoring, mod me down if you like.
(Score: 2) by bugamn on Monday June 23 2014, @07:13PM
I thought you would cite this one: http://xkcd.com/435/ [xkcd.com]
I applaud you on your non-obvious choice.
(Score: 1) by MickLinux on Tuesday June 24 2014, @01:18AM
The answer to the five problems, in order (L to R, then down) are:
1. Parental affection 2.Best kept platonic 3. trust when separated by distance 4. Puppy love 5. Monasticism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @11:50AM
Yes, another pop math book to see on the remainder table next year. They keep cranking these out despite the fact that they don't ever seem to sell.
If you want a good read, "Love and Math" from Edward Frenkel is highly recommended, especially when it hits the remainder table for a few bucks.
Frenkel's book is discouraging - to even approach it, you'd have to already be a math expert. And he's oversimplifying things. I know more about math than the average person, but was bewildered because I had never been exposed to most of the math in this book. To really understand modern math, you almost have to be a career math expert. Even trying to catch up on some of the stuff I missed, I realized I would need years of intense study to really get anything out of this book. Math is too complex for casual dipping.
(Score: 1) by MickLinux on Tuesday June 24 2014, @01:33AM
Aside from that, having read the article (not the book), the case made posits that more ta@es can be better as a mathematical proof that never gets made. Just posited.
Though I am not 100% against taxes, I am very much against the pseudoscientific myth that is used to prop up a political philosophy, just as things are falling apart.
Much better example, for me, is the comparison between the parallel axis theorem in combining second moments of inertia, and variances in combining data; with that comparison, one can see that standard devintion measures the resistance to spin.
Or consider the limits of data compression, n log n, vs. The second law of thermo. Quickly it becomes apparent that the second law of therm is not just a statistical thing, but is tied up in the meaning of a unique situation, which in turn depends on the Pauli exclusion principle.
(Score: 4, Funny) by darthservo on Monday June 23 2014, @01:04PM
Why, just the other day, my friend Jimmy gave me three of his apples and then asked me how many he had left!
"Good judgment seeks balance and progress. Lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration." - Dwight D Eisenhower
(Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Monday June 23 2014, @01:12PM
+1 funny
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @03:15PM
I take slight offence at calling this approach mathematical. It's more like statistics and common sense.
Real math doesn't have anything in common with the common sense. For example, where do these 24-dimensional lattices keep popping out from? Seriously wtf.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 24 2014, @05:26AM
If maths seems theoretical to you, you need to read more maths.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 24 2014, @06:52AM
I wouldn't say theoretical, because math isn't science. It's more a journey to find universal invariants of logic. But if you think it's easy, predictable and linear, well, there are surprises coming up.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by siwelwerd on Monday June 23 2014, @03:50PM
I really wish we would stop using the term "math" for the algorithm-following that is taught through secondary school. It's like using the same word to mean both using a saw and intricate furniture design. Math i truly a creative endeavor, about discovery, not about being handed facts and told a sequence of steps to follow. Most people say they hate "math", but they have never even been told what math is!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @05:23PM
Why is your contribution to the discussion just a restatement of TFA without anything new?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 23 2014, @06:31PM
I blame the examples in TFA. The creative stuff in them isn't really math and the part that is, isn't creative. Yet it's correct in that real difficult math is like that. You have to try out a lot of random ideas before you can solve unsolved stuff. The difference is that math really deals with absolutes. When something is proven there's no chance that you find out later that you picked a wrong idea.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday June 24 2014, @08:11AM
"Math" in ancient Greek did not mean any particular area, it just meant "studies". This is somewhat preserved in the British dialect of English, where they persist in referring to "maths". So agreed, it should by no means be only applied to arts of calculation (a lower arts best left to taxis (Look up calcule) and accountants), or reckoning (as in navigation or surveying or cartography), but the true art of inference and proofs, and of course astronomy, as the gods intended. Hopa!