Math is racist

[Radagast]

we also know that 2+2 is not always equal to 4

No, 2+2=4. Always. Everywhere. It was true before the universe was created; it will be true when the present universe has passed away.

Nope, never said anything about being by any textbook

I was the one who cited the textbook. Because if you're going to bring modular arithmetic into the thread, do it right. Otherwise you're just spouting nonsense.

Indeed, they are different statements.

This is the thing about postmodernism. It renders meaningful debate impossible.

But the numbers 0 and 4 are not the same. They don't even look the same.

I'm hoping that's a joke. Surely you don't really think that's an actual argument?

False. There is plenty of ambiguity in mathematics.

No, there really isn't "plenty of ambiguity in mathematics."

Devlin's Angle: Most Math Problems Do Not Have a Unique Right Answer

He is, of course, totally wrong (or, more accurately, he expresses himself poorly). Math problems have a unique right answer. Business problems, however, do not.

This offers a challenge for the applied mathematician. He or she may be hired to solve business problem A, which has possible answers P, Q, R, and S. The applied mathematician can turn business problem A into one of the mathematical problems T, U, and V, which have unique answers X, Y, and Z respectively. The difficulty is in going from one or more of X, Y, and Z to P, Q, R, and S. But that's not a mathematical difficulty.

Mathematics is a language

Mathematics has a language. Mathematics is a lot more than just a language.

If you saw my perspective, you wouldn't be misunderstanding it.

I see your perspective, I just think it's wrong. Dangerously so, in fact.

Never said anything about culture, but your conclusion here is false.

Well, culture has been the topic of the entire thread, starting with post #1.

And let me repeat myself: Mayan, Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian, and Chinese mathematicians came up with the same answers to the same questions (of course, they didn't always ask the same questions). In particular, they all used different symbols to express the fact that 2+2=4. Because, in mathematics, there really is "one and only one possible result," which does not depend on culture.

You were the one who cited Keith Devlin. He says that we all "know that there are eternal truths within mathematics (a better term would be 'tautologies')." One of those eternal truths is 2+2=4.

 

[bekkilyn]

No, 2+2=4. Always. Everywhere. It was true before the universe was created; it will be true when the present universe has passed away.

I was the one who cited the textbook. Because if you're going to bring modular arithmetic into the thread, do it right. Otherwise you're just spouting nonsense.

This is the thing about postmodernism. It renders meaningful debate impossible.

Are you trying to be funny, or do you really think that's an actual argument?

No, there really isn't.

He is, of course, totally wrong (or, more accurately, he expresses himself poorly). Math problems have a unique right answer. Business problems, however, do not.

This offers a challenge for the applied mathematician. He or she may be hired to solve business problem A, which has possible answers P, Q, R, and S. The applied mathematician can turn business problem A into one of the mathematical problems T, U, and V, which have unique answers X, Y, and Z respectively. The difficulty is in going from one or more of X, Y, and Z to P, Q, R, and S. But that's not a mathematical difficulty.

Mathematics has a language. Mathematics is a lot more than just a language.

I see your perspective, I just think it's wrong. Dangerously so, in fact.

Well, culture has been the topic of the entire thread, starting with post #1.

And let me repeat myself: Mayan, Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian, and Chinese mathematicians came up with the same answers to the same questions. In particular, they all used different symbols to express the fact that 2+2=4. Because, in mathematics, there really is "one and only one possible result," which does not depend on culture.

Think bigger when it comes to mathematics. We know that 2+2 can be equal to other numbers besides 4, so why be fixed on the idea that it is only equal to 4?

And again, I said nothing whatsoever about depending on culture or post-modernism (or racism) and everything about thinking outside of the textbook. 2+2 being only 4 isn't a political statement that must be defended at all costs.

As far as mathematics having "one and only one possible result," I'll be siding with the mathematicians on this one. There is ambiguity in math and many types of problems have multiple solutions (i.e. quadratic equations).

Plus, there is only so much you can milk out of a statement that "math is racist" so why not just talk about math in general since everything about the other has already been said?

I'd also argue that instead of 2+2=4 being true before and after the universe has passed away, I'd suggest that 7 (or is it 777?) be used instead since it is supposed to be the number for God and 2+2=4 could very well be considered as idolatry, unless of course there is some way to show that 2+2=7....

 

[Radagast]

Think bigger when it comes to mathematics.

There's an old saying about grandmothers and eggs. Consider it said.

As far as mathematics having "one and only one possible result," I'll be siding with the mathematicians on this one.

I'm an applied mathematician by profession, as it happens. I have been such for a ridiculously long period of time (I didn't quite use clay tablets in my youth, but almost). I have a ridiculously long list of qualifications. Does that mean that your are agreeing with me?

... thought not.

There is ambiguity in math and many types of problems have multiple solutions (i.e. quadratic equations).

For any equation in one variable (x), the solution is the set of x's that satisfy the equation. That set is the "unique answer." It may have have 0, 1, 2, 3, .... or infinitely many elements. For example:

• x^2 + 1 = 0 over the reals has solution {}
• x^2 = 0 over the reals has solution {0}
  
• x^2 = x over the reals has solution {0, 1}
  
• x = x over any set S has solution S

I'd also argue that instead of 2+2=4 being true before and after the universe has passed away

How many persons are there in the Trinity? How many persons were there in the Trinity before Creation?

 

[Hammster]

I understand all of what you are saying, and have studied equivalence classes, but it doesn't at all negate that 2+2 does not always equal 4.

Sometimes 2+2 can equal 0.

Sometimes 2+2 can equal some other number. And we haven't even brought in the possibilities of different measurement scales.

So while 0 = 4 can be a true statement based on equivalence classes and everything you're presented in order to complicate things since there is no need here to go into the theory behind modular arithmetic, 0 is not the same as 4.

2+2=4 and 2+2=0 are not the same equation. 2+2=4 is not the same as 2+2=0. Perhaps they can be shown to be equivalent, but it still doesn't mean that they are the same.

I see your perspective just fine and I'm not saying it's incorrect, but your perspective is not the only way to see things. 2+2 does not always equal 4. Sometimes 2+2 is equal to 0. Sometimes 2+2 is equal to some other number. All may be correct based on how it's determined. All may be equivalent. But all are not the same. You are too fixed to the textbook to be able to see my perspective, but it is still easy enough for even a child to visually see that a 0 and a 4 are not the same regardless of whether or not they are equal, equivalent, or congruent, or display lines on the top or bottom.

We could even look at it in terms of money. There used to be $2 bills for a short time. Well on the surface using two of those bills 2+2 would be equal to 4 right, but what if there was deflation, then 2+2 would be some number less than 4, or if they grow in value, then 2+2 may be 1,250 in terms of money.

There are many examples we can use to show that 2+2 is not always equal to 4.

Still of course doesn't mean it has anything to do with racism. It's just that mathematics isn't meant to be contained within a neatly defined box with one and only one possible result.

Two $2 bills would still equal $4.

 

[durangodawood]

I remember the title of one of the poems from that English class. It was called Radical Chic, and it was read on video by two well-dressed ladies sipping white wine at a posh cafe, professing their admiration for the Sandinistas or something like that. Now there are at least two ways one could mock radical chic: the way I would do it, or the way my teacher's poet friend did it - by encouraging the ladies to actually become radical.

Can I ask what school this was?

 

[bekkilyn]

There's an old saying about grandmothers and eggs. Consider it said.

I'm an applied mathematician by profession, as it happens. I have been such for a ridiculously long period of time (I didn't quite use clay tablets in my youth, but almost). I have a ridiculously long list of qualifications. Does that mean that your are agreeing with me?

... thought not.

For any equation in one variable (x), the solution is the set of x's that satisfy the equation. That set is the "unique answer." It may have have 0, 1, 2, 3, .... or infinitely many elements. For example:

• x^2 + 1 = 0 over the reals has solution {}
• x^2 = 0 over the reals has solution {0}
  
• x^2 = x over the reals has solution {0, 1}
  
• x = x over any set S has solution S

How many persons are there in the Trinity? How many persons were there in the Trinity before Creation?

Applied math...that explains it.

 

[bekkilyn]

Two $2 bills would still equal $4.

Only on the surface level, but if the value of the $2 bills has increased or decreased, the result could be higher or lower than $4. Since they've been out of print for a few decades now, they are probably worth more than $4 nowadays.

This thread has been an interesting experiment, I must admit.

 

[Hammster]

Only on the surface level, but if the value of the $2 bills has increased or decreased, the result could be higher or lower than $4. Since they've been out of print for a few decades now, they are probably worth more than $4 nowadays.

This thread has been an interesting experiment, I must admit.

I have a $2 bill in my wallet right now. If I add two $1 bills, I can go into a store and purchase $4 worth of stuff. The rarity of the bill doesn’t change that.

 

[bekkilyn]

I have a $2 bill in my wallet right now. If I add two $1 bills, I can go into a store and purchase $4 worth of stuff. The rarity of the bill doesn’t change that.

Sure (although technically that would be 2+1+1 instead of 2+2) but it's not an absolute case if you came across someone who recognized the increased value of the $2 versus the $1 bills. You could treat it like a normal $4 or it could result in $40 depending on the value to someone who really wants the $2 bill and is willing to pay more than $2 for it.

 

[eucatastrophe]

No, 2+2=4. Always. Everywhere. It was true before the universe was created; it will be true when the present universe has passed away.



I was the one who cited the textbook. Because if you're going to bring modular arithmetic into the thread, do it right. Otherwise you're just spouting nonsense.



This is the thing about postmodernism. It renders meaningful debate impossible.

Not the Bee: Teacher, BLM activist says "2 + 2 = 4" is a "cultural" belief based on "western imperialism/colonization"

You are absolutely right, so I think the original article that sparked the thread needs to be brought forward again. 2+2=4 is a universal because it is derived from experience. We can express that truth non verbally. Just hold two seeds in one hand and two in the other. Put them together as a new set. Do this a few times in front of anyone, anywhere and the idea will be obvious to them. Because it comes from experience, it is cross cultural. In fact, it is these unusual mathematics like modular math which are cultural. These systems are mostly the product of Western culture over the last two centuries, so maybe she should have said that "2+2 doesn't always equal 4" is white imperialism? lol!

 

[eucatastrophe]

Sure (although technically that would be 2+1+1 instead of 2+2) but it's not an absolute case if you came across someone who recognized the increased value of the $2 versus the $1 bills. You could treat it like a normal $4 or it could result in $40 depending on the value to someone who really wants the $2 bill and is willing to pay more than $2 for it.

You are crossing back and forth between face value and perceived value. And it is true whether you are talking about purchasing power (inflation/deflation) or collectors value. That is not a legitimate argument.

 

[Radagast]

Not the Bee: Teacher, BLM activist says "2 + 2 = 4" is a "cultural" belief based on "western imperialism/colonization"

You are absolutely right, so I think the original article that sparked the thread needs to be brought forward again. 2+2=4 is a universal because it is derived from experience.

Bringing forward the O.P. is a great idea. To be honest, I'd say that 2+2=4 was a necessary (and a priori) truth, not a contingent truth.

I'm not sure if that constitutes disagreement; it depends on what you mean by "derived from experience."

Certainly it's not cultural; it's not like 2+2=5 was true for the Mayans and 2+2=7 for the Chinese and 2+2=4 for the Middle East and Europe.

We can express that truth non verbally. Just hold two seeds in one hand and two in the other. Put them together as a new set.

Indeed. For most of us, the discovery that 2+2=4 happened further back than we can remember.

Another good example is quadratic equations. They were first solved by the ancient Babylonians. Their method was a variation on what we call "completing the square." Their answers were, of course, the same as ours (except that they didn't know about negative and complex solutions).

 

[Hammster]

Sure (although technically that would be 2+1+1 instead of 2+2) but it's not an absolute case if you came across someone who recognized the increased value of the $2 versus the $1 bills. You could treat it like a normal $4 or it could result in $40 depending on the value to someone who really wants the $2 bill and is willing to pay more than $2 for it.

Which still doesn’t change that two $2 bills equal $4.

 

[eucatastrophe]

Bringing forward the O.P. is a great idea. To be honest, I'd say that 2+2=4 was a necessary (and a priori) truth, not a contingent truth.

I'm not sure if that constitutes disagreement; it depends on what you mean by "derived from experience."

Certainly it's not cultural; it's not like 2+2=5 was true for the Mayans and 2+2=7 for the Chinese and 2+2=4 for the Middle East and Europe.

Oh, I agree completely. I should have said that it CAN BE derived from experience, not to imply it's ultimate origin is experience.

 

[bekkilyn]

Which still doesn’t change that two $2 bills equal $4.

And yet it still doesn't mean that they are *only* equal to $4.

 

[Radagast]

Certainly it's not cultural; it's not like 2+2=5 was true for the Mayans and 2+2=7 for the Chinese and 2+2=4 for the Middle East and Europe.

That said, there are no doubt cultural factors in which branches of mathematics societies chose to pursue.

Agricultural societies around the world have pursued astronomy (it helps with deciding when to plant). Empires have needed mathematics for planning. Traders have needed business mathematics. The Greeks pioneered mathematics for its own sake ("pure" mathematics).

But when people investigate the same thing, the answers are always the same. 2+2=4. The volume of a sphere is ⅔ times the circumference at the equator times the square of the radius. The prime factors of 21 are 3 and 7.

 

[Hammster]

And yet it still doesn't mean that they are *only* equal to $4.

Yes it does.

 

[bekkilyn]

Yes it does.

*sticks out tongue*

 

[Chesterton]

Can I ask what school this was?

The Friedrich Engels Institute for...just kidding, University of Texas San Antonio. Can I ask where your experience was?

 

[durangodawood]

The Friedrich Engels Institute for...just kidding, University of Texas San Antonio. Can I ask where your experience was?

Berkeley. Yes, that one. I think its rep as liberal bastion is a little overblown. The academic standards are quite high there, to the point that total nonsense is pretty rare, which comports with my experience. Town is another matter...or was, before gentrification became almost total.