3 ms·

Math can be considered at least aspect of everything (though this is often reductionist). There is an unrealistic expectation that everyone can or should turn t

Math can be considered at least aspect of everything (though this is often reductionist). There is an unrealistic expectation that everyone can or should turn their attention to it, and a reality that those who have math training often have an advantage, especially in key societal positions. The author is stating that there is an advantage for some people to have the conditions to learn. The final paragraph seems to indicate that conditions need to be created for more people to have this opportunity. It would be magical thinking to expect the vast majority of people could juggle their everyday lives to become very good at math in ways that are more meaningful than being good at crossword puzzles or baking or taking care of their families at key times, not to mention having more than one focused interest. Since there is a "society" it shouldn't be critical for everyone to have the same developed skills, which the conclusion seems a bit disconnected from.

macspoofing 10y ago
>There is an unrealistic expectation that everyone can or should turn their attention to it, and a reality that those who have math training often have an advantage, especially in key societal positions. Ok. That makes sense. Specialized knowledge is required for specialized work. What's your point? >The author is stating that there is an advantage for some people to have the conditions to learn. I guess this is the meat of the argument the author is making, with some ideologically-driven, and here unstated, reasons that explain this 'advantage'. >Since there is a "society" it shouldn't be critical for everyone to have the same developed skills, which the conclusion seems a bit disconnected from. But it isn't critical. There is a requirement to have a base level understanding of mathematics in order function in society (roughly high-school level), just as there is a requirement for literacy - but there's certainly no requirement to have in-depth knowledge of it. Nor is a deep understanding of math a prerequisite for success, financial or otherwise.

macspoofing 10y ago

>There is an unrealistic expectation that everyone can or should turn their attention to it, and a reality that those who have math training often have an advantage, especially in key societal positions. Ok. That makes sense. Specialized knowledge is required for specialized work. What's your point? >The author is stating that there is an advantage for some people to have the conditions to learn. I guess this is the meat of the argument the author is making, with some ideologically-driven, and here unstated, reasons that explain this 'advantage'. >Since there is a "society" it shouldn't be critical for everyone to have the same developed skills, which the conclusion seems a bit disconnected from. But it isn't critical. There is a requirement to have a base level understanding of mathematics in order function in society (roughly high-school level), just as there is a requirement for literacy - but there's certainly no requirement to have in-depth knowledge of it. Nor is a deep understanding of math a prerequisite for success, financial or otherwise.