Math is racist

[cappycappy]

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

Yep. It’s true.

That's interesting. Arabic numerals are from the middle east/India. Math, as we know it, didn't originate in "white" areas of Europe.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

What does it say about you as a person when you see racism in even the most mundane of things as a basic mathematical sum? Do these types of people, lunatics (who should probably be put in mental asylums) contribute anything to society in the ever expanding quest to dismantle and deconstruct the system?

Racism as a word, has lost all meaning, hence why no one should take it seriously. At least when talking to people like this. They've expanded the definition so much that even math is subject to accusations and it's not even as if such a basic sum arose in the west to begin with. I would have thought that very basic sum would have been in Africa, Asia and the Middle east as well since the time of trading and commerce originated.

Yet you're going to see people here and elsewhere attempt to justify this nonsense.

 

[Arcangl86]

What does it say about you as a person when you see racism in even the most mundane of things as a basic mathematical sum? Do these types of people, lunatics (who should probably be put in mental asylums) contribute anything to society in the ever expanding quest to dismantle and deconstruct the system?

Racism as a word, has lost all meaning, hence why no one should take it seriously. At least when talking to people like this. They've expanded the definition so much that even math is subject to accusations and it's not even as if such a basic sum arose in the west to begin with. I would have thought that very basic sum would have been in Africa, Asia and the Middle east as well since the time of trading and commerce originated.

Yet you're going to see people here and elsewhere attempt to justify this nonsense.

2+2=4 is only true if you use a decimal system. While it has become universal now, there where many different bases that have historically been used for math, and those differences are cultural. What this person was saying was that the idea that 2+2 can only equal four is a result of those other positional systems being replaced by it through colonization. That much is true.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

2+2=4 is only true if you use a decimal system. While it has become universal now, there where many different bases that have historically been used for math, and those differences are cultural. What this person was saying was that the idea that 2+2 can only equal four is a result of those other positional systems being replaced by it through colonization. That much is true.

Can you point me to the civilization which said if I have two sticks in that pile and two sticks in this pile, I have something other than four sticks total? Can you also show me that such a civilization was right and we should use their method as a basis for mathematics?

 

[Tom 1]

Postmodernism.

Post opposable digits and knowing what planet you are on.

 

[Arcangl86]

Can you point me to the civilization which said if I have two sticks in that pile and two sticks in this pile, I have something other than four sticks total? Can you also show me that such a civilization was right and we should use their method as a basis for mathematics?

Sure. Rome. Ancient Egypt. But if you want to take positional systems, the Alamblak speakers in Papua New Guinea are a good example. They don't have a word for "4". It would be "two twos" for them. And modern computers don't even have "2" They have 0 and 1. Analog computers have 0,1,2 so all numbers are combinations of that. The Maori probably had a base 20 counting system before the British arrived, though that's being debating. The Ancient Babylonians use base 60, which is still used to divide minutes and hours. Granted not many cultures used base 2 or 3, but base four was also fairly common. And as for right and wrong, there isn't such a thing. Some number systems are easier to use then others, but mathematics isn't restricted to a particular base. As far as a universal constant 4=11=100=10. They all represent the same value, and you can perform the same operations with them and get the same base value.

I'm also not saying that we shouldn't use the decimal system, but I'm saying that the idea that the decimal system is the only possible system that can be used is problematic, especially when we aren't even consistent in our use of it in society.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

And as for right and wrong, there isn't such a thing.

Cause that would be insanity right lol

 

[eucatastrophe]

You are deranged, you don't exist
Reality's all in your mind
Give it up, you'll never resist
You'll confess, then you die

We are the law, we control your pain
Telling you how to behave
We are the voice inside your brain
You're nothing but a lifeless slave


Black is white and white is black
The fact's a lie and the lie's a fact
You are the dead and the dead are alive
Two plus two equals five

You are alone, you cannot hide
We see every move that you make
You are the last, your dreams have died
Even your past is a fake

We are the cure, we'll make you sane
And purge every sin from your life
Break you down, erase your name
Not even your shadow survives

Peace means war, rich means poor and perfect flawed
Less means more, five means four and hate adore
Love means law, true means false and break restore
Dusk means dawn, here means gone, unbend deform
Die means born, admire means scorn, to know ignore
Won means lost, calm means storm, forget recall
Stand means fall, run means crawl, attack withdraw
Weak means strong, right means wrong, diverge conform

 

[eucatastrophe]

Don't confuse the underlying principle with the language used to express it.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Sure. Rome. Ancient Egypt. But if you want to take positional systems, the Alamblak speakers in Papua New Guinea are a good example. They don't have a word for "4". It would be "two twos" for them. And modern computers don't even have "2" They have 0 and 1. Analog computers have 0,1,2 so all numbers are combinations of that. The Maori probably had a base 20 counting system before the British arrived, though that's being debating. The Ancient Babylonians use base 60, which is still used to divide minutes and hours. Granted not many cultures used base 2 or 3, but base four was also fairly common. And as for right and wrong, there isn't such a thing. Some number systems are easier to use then others, but mathematics isn't restricted to a particular base. As far as a universal constant 4=11=100=10. They all represent the same value, and you can perform the same operations with them and get the same base value.

I'm also not saying that we shouldn't use the decimal system, but I'm saying that the idea that the decimal system is the only possible system that can be used is problematic, especially when we aren't even consistent in our use of it in society.

All this is interesting and it's things I didn't know. Yet do any of these systems undermine mathematics as a subject and make any particular expression of it racist? The decimal system itself doesn't even originate from the west but India and no system, can make in my example, there be anything other than four sticks as a concept. Is not the decimal system used because it makes mathematics easier? We could express ourselves in countless 1s and 0s or even roman numerals but would be rather burdensome.

I find the Idea of calling a mathematical system racist because of it's prevalence and it being part of the traditional teaching curriculum of the west to be wholly unproductive. Mathematics as knowledge is not inherently racist and neither is the means by which it is communicated. This would be akin to saying the teaching of English to Japanese people is racist. It's a nonsense statement.

 

[Chesterton]

Post opposable digits and knowing what planet you are on.

I don't get it.

 

[Radagast]

You are the one who came up with the specific example of 2+2=5.

And it wasn't just a random choice.

There isn't a number system I'm aware of where that is true, but 2+2=11 and 2+2=10 are both valid expressions. The base that is used in a positional system is cultural, not absolute.

But, from a mathematical point of view, the base doesn't matter, and the exact symbols don't matter.

Whether you write ••+••=•••• (Mayan) or II+II=IV (Roman) or β+β=δ (Greek) or 2+2=4 (modern) or S(S(0))+S(S(0))=S(S(S(S(0)))) (theoretical) or 10+10=100 (binary), the meaning is the same, because the meaning doesn't depend on culture.

Using binary, or octal, or decimal, or hexadecimal, or sexagesimal are not "different ways of knowing," they are just different ways of recording the same, universal, mathematical truths.

 

[Radagast]

That's interesting. Arabic numerals are from the middle east/India. Math, as we know it, didn't originate in "white" areas of Europe.

Math, as we know it, originated in what is now Iraq. We still hang on to the Babylonian base-60 system when we work with hours, minutes, and seconds.

 

[Radagast]

Sure. Rome. Ancient Egypt. But if you want to take positional systems, the Alamblak speakers in Papua New Guinea are a good example. They don't have a word for "4". It would be "two twos" for them. And modern computers don't even have "2" They have 0 and 1. Analog computers have 0,1,2 so all numbers are combinations of that. The Maori probably had a base 20 counting system before the British arrived, though that's being debating. The Ancient Babylonians use base 60, which is still used to divide minutes and hours. Granted not many cultures used base 2 or 3, but base four was also fairly common. And as for right and wrong, there isn't such a thing. Some number systems are easier to use then others, but mathematics isn't restricted to a particular base. As far as a universal constant 4=11=100=10. They all represent the same value, and you can perform the same operations with them and get the same base value.

I'm also not saying that we shouldn't use the decimal system, but I'm saying that the idea that the decimal system is the only possible system that can be used is problematic, especially when we aren't even consistent in our use of it in society.

And all those people agree that if you have two (zwei, δύο) sticks in that pile and two (due, दो) sticks in this pile, you have exactly four (cuatro, 四) sticks total.

 

[bekkilyn]

Using binary, or octal, or decimal, or hexadecimal, or sexagesimal are not "different ways of knowing," they are just different ways of recording the same, universal, mathematical truths.

42

 

[J_B_]

Is this the thread where we get to discuss different systems of arithmetic? It's really cool and I've been waiting for the opportunity, so I hope this means people are finally interested.

 

[J_B_]

2+2=4 is only true if you use a decimal system. While it has become universal now, there where many different bases that have historically been used for math, and those differences are cultural. What this person was saying was that the idea that 2+2 can only equal four is a result of those other positional systems being replaced by it through colonization. That much is true.

Adding two and two is always four, no matter the number base.

 

[eucatastrophe]

42

Answers are easy, it is the questions that are often inscrutable.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

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

Yep. It’s true.

I am curious to what a non-racist answer to 2+2 would be? Could this explain why the left seem to have difficulty understanding simple economics and budget?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Adding two and two is always four, no matter the number base.

2+2=22