3 ms·

Gatekeeping? Quite the opposite. Rather, sadness. I think that the system has failed the author, and deprived them of fun. If I met them, I'd tell them the sa

Gatekeeping? Quite the opposite. Rather, sadness. I think that the system has failed the author, and deprived them of fun. If I met them, I'd tell them the same thing I'd tell you: come back to math! There's fun and beauty in it, and suffering is not a necessary component of that. As far as your math grad friends go: the school, most likely, is failing them. Statistically, about half of them are depressed. Most have no job prospects that will allow them to keep doing what they are trained to do (simple matter of #students >> #positions). Ask them how often they considered suicide (not if), the answers may surprise you. Graduate school does make mathematics (amd life) a funless process way too often - and that's a problem. But that's not how things should and can be. Please read Lockhart's Lament I linked to in order to understand my point better. What I ultimately am saying is that what is being pushed onto people as math is way to often isn't really, in a way that a cheese product isn't cheese.

iorrus 8y ago
I read Lockhart's Lament, I had the opposite reaction, maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. If it had as little practical application as painting or music it would be nonexistent as a school subject. He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. Picasso's realism phase. Musical theory etc.
- romwell 8y ago
  >He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. They still get to do it: they get to paint, play, sing, etc. Most math students don't get to do math. They learn about it until a year or two into grad school sometimes. >maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. His point is that what is taught is mathematics as much as the names of notes is music.
  - posterboy 8y ago
    Don't forget that the elementary math learned by the billions was ince new and exiting. The proofs are simple enough to stay implicit, but the learning process is creative discovery. Because you need to see applicability of what is learned, in order to remember it. Consequently, many don't even successfully learn about maths. Insofar you are right, but wrong and elitist to generalize.

iorrus 8y ago

I read Lockhart's Lament, I had the opposite reaction, maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. If it had as little practical application as painting or music it would be nonexistent as a school subject. He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. Picasso's realism phase. Musical theory etc.

romwell 8y ago
>He is wrong in that painters and musicians tend to get rigorous instruction in the basics before they become independently creative. They still get to do it: they get to paint, play, sing, etc. Most math students don't get to do math. They learn about it until a year or two into grad school sometimes. >maths is one of the few arts that is actually taught in school. His point is that what is taught is mathematics as much as the names of notes is music.
- posterboy 8y ago
  Don't forget that the elementary math learned by the billions was ince new and exiting. The proofs are simple enough to stay implicit, but the learning process is creative discovery. Because you need to see applicability of what is learned, in order to remember it. Consequently, many don't even successfully learn about maths. Insofar you are right, but wrong and elitist to generalize.