3 ms·
I think the author is deliberately conflating two interpretations of "Math is Everywhere." It's hard to argue that it isn't, when we talk about different field
by sevensor 10y ago
I think the author is deliberately conflating two interpretations of "Math is Everywhere." It's hard to argue that it isn't, when we talk about different fields of endeavor. Deep in any remunerative profession, from selling groceries to manufacturing semiconductors, there are quantitative models, and it helps to know at least trigonometry and calculus, if not differential equations, to understand them. But the author isn't actually talking about quantitative models -- this is the bait-and-switch -- he's actually talking about dramatically uneven mathematical education and widespread innumeracy.
- jib 10y agoYeah it is a straw man from what I can see. "Math can be used to model just about everything, and so can make a meaningful contribution to almost every endeavour" is a completely different statement from "Everyone has access to learning math to do anything math-related they want". The second argument is not one I have heard people making, and if they make it I doubt they would express it as "Math is Everywhere". I have heard people make the first argument as "Math is Everywhere".
- pyrale 10y agoThere is this, but the bait and switch actually has a justification in his mind : by publicly acknowledging that math is everywhere in the first and promoting this fact, we reinforce the extent to which innumeracy impacts those who suffer from it. This is a political opinion, of course, and not an assessment on the extent to which maths help people.