3 ms·

A nice sentiment but clearly a large % of people never do learn even basic mathematical thinking and seem very confused by it. So is there some scientific study

A nice sentiment but clearly a large % of people never do learn even basic mathematical thinking and seem very confused by it. So is there some scientific study backing up the claim that all these people could easily learn it or are we just making it up because its a nice egalitarian thesis for a math popularization book?

Jtsummers 2y ago
> So is there some scientific study backing up the claim that all these people could easily learn it [emphasis added] Who said it would be easy?
- Jensson 2y ago
  It is easy to learn for some.
logicchains 2y ago
>A nice sentiment but clearly a large % of people never do learn even basic mathematical thinking and seem very confused by it Any healthy/able individual could learn to deadlift twice their bodyweight with sufficient training, but the vast majority of people never reach this basic fitness milestone, because they don't put any time into achieving it. There's a very large gap between what people are capable of theoretically and what they achieve in practice.
- paxcoder 2y ago
  [dead]
physicsguy 2y ago
That certain countries both now and in the past have had significantly higher mathematical ability among the general population and much higher proportions going on to further study suggests that ability isn’t innate but that people don’t choose it. In the Soviet Union more time was spent teaching mathematics and a whole culture developed around mathematics being fun.
- strken 2y ago
  Why would ability not be innate just because some people with the ability don't use it? Or more specifically, two of my friends teach special needs children in the 50 to 70 IQ band. Who are we going to blame for them not becoming mathematicians? The teachers, for not unlocking their hidden potential? The kids, for not trying hard enough? Claiming that the only thing holding them back is choice seems as cruel as it is wrong, to me. Yeah, we're probably not cultivating anywhere near the potential that we could, but I personally guarantee you I am not Ramanujan or Terence Tao.
  - physicsguy 2y ago
    Well, I guess what I mean is that most people have some level of general intelligence that when applied correctly can generally give good results in most subjects. In general the people who do well in school do well in everything, even if they have a preference, and as such could do well in most of those subjects if they went on to further study. The evidence tends to be that in lower income countries people push towards subjects more likely to bring financial stability than those they prefer which bears this out somewhat. There are some extreme cases of course but I’m not sure the general public needs to worry too much about those, most of us aren’t an Einstein nor do we have learning disabilities.
    - j7ake 2y ago
      The extreme case does not imply a binary scenario ie that there are those that can those that cannot. Rather, learning ability is a continuum. people have varying degrees of ability to learn mathematics. Couple this with environmental factors and society generates a huge variability in mathematical ability that crosses income levels and other demographics. This view is rejected by many because it is against the push for equality.
      - fluoridation 2y ago
        You get a huge variability if you consider the absolute extreme outliers. Most people should be able to reach a level of competence where they can understand mathematical concepts abstractly and apply that same reasoning to other areas, and not feel a visceral rejection at the mere idea. I think that's a modest enough standard that a good portion of any given population should be able to reach, and yet education is failing at achieving that.
cchi_co 2y ago
[dead]
barrenko 2y ago
We are not really taught (thought) to think, we are taught to memorize. Until one actually tries to think, you really can't tell if they're able to do it.
brodo 2y ago
The same goes for language skills, by the way. In the US, 21% of adults are illiterate, and 54% of adults have literacy below sixth-grade level.[1] This is higher than in other developed countries. For example, in Germany, 10% are illiterate, and 32% have literacy below fifth-grade level.[2] General intelligence also seems to have been trending downward since the 1970s (the reverse Flynn Effect)[3]. It has been measured in the US and Europe. So, while it is true that the education system and other factors have an influence, the idea that "everybody is capable of X" is wrong and harmful. It's the equivalent of "nobody needs a wheelchair" or "everybody can see perfectly." People are different. A lot of nerds only hang out with other nerds, which screws up their perception of society. [1]: https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-statistics-2022-2023 https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-s... [2]: https://leo.blogs.uni-hamburg.de https://leo.blogs.uni-hamburg.de [3]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289623000156 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028962...
- j2kun 2y ago
  What a weird comment. Are you trying to argue by analogy that a decent fraction of the population are not capable of literacy? It seems self-evident that low literacy rates have nothing to do with innate ability. I see no evidence to suggest that math is any different.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  The idea that 21% of US adults are "illiterate" doesn't mean they can't read, by the way: > English literacy test results from 2014 suggest that 21% of U.S. adults ages 16 to 65 score at or below PIAAC literacy level 1, meaning they have difficulty "[completing] tasks that require comparing and contrasting information, paraphrasing, or making low-level inferences." Included in that 21% is the 4.2% of respondents who were unable to be assessed due to language barriers, cognitive disability, or physical disability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States A lot of people aren't aware that the academic definition of "literacy" was changed around 1950 to no longer refer to "alphabetical literacy", which is still what most people think literacy means (in lay usage). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy And this particular survey ignored people who didn't speak English but were entirely literate in their native language. Which obviously has nothing to do with the educational system or people's intelligence.

Jtsummers 2y ago

> So is there some scientific study backing up the claim that all these people could easily learn it [emphasis added] Who said it would be easy?

Jensson 2y ago
It is easy to learn for some.

logicchains 2y ago

>A nice sentiment but clearly a large % of people never do learn even basic mathematical thinking and seem very confused by it Any healthy/able individual could learn to deadlift twice their bodyweight with sufficient training, but the vast majority of people never reach this basic fitness milestone, because they don't put any time into achieving it. There's a very large gap between what people are capable of theoretically and what they achieve in practice.

paxcoder 2y ago
[dead]

physicsguy 2y ago

That certain countries both now and in the past have had significantly higher mathematical ability among the general population and much higher proportions going on to further study suggests that ability isn’t innate but that people don’t choose it. In the Soviet Union more time was spent teaching mathematics and a whole culture developed around mathematics being fun.

strken 2y ago
Why would ability not be innate just because some people with the ability don't use it? Or more specifically, two of my friends teach special needs children in the 50 to 70 IQ band. Who are we going to blame for them not becoming mathematicians? The teachers, for not unlocking their hidden potential? The kids, for not trying hard enough? Claiming that the only thing holding them back is choice seems as cruel as it is wrong, to me. Yeah, we're probably not cultivating anywhere near the potential that we could, but I personally guarantee you I am not Ramanujan or Terence Tao.
- physicsguy 2y ago
  Well, I guess what I mean is that most people have some level of general intelligence that when applied correctly can generally give good results in most subjects. In general the people who do well in school do well in everything, even if they have a preference, and as such could do well in most of those subjects if they went on to further study. The evidence tends to be that in lower income countries people push towards subjects more likely to bring financial stability than those they prefer which bears this out somewhat. There are some extreme cases of course but I’m not sure the general public needs to worry too much about those, most of us aren’t an Einstein nor do we have learning disabilities.
  - j7ake 2y ago
    The extreme case does not imply a binary scenario ie that there are those that can those that cannot. Rather, learning ability is a continuum. people have varying degrees of ability to learn mathematics. Couple this with environmental factors and society generates a huge variability in mathematical ability that crosses income levels and other demographics. This view is rejected by many because it is against the push for equality.
    - fluoridation 2y ago
      You get a huge variability if you consider the absolute extreme outliers. Most people should be able to reach a level of competence where they can understand mathematical concepts abstractly and apply that same reasoning to other areas, and not feel a visceral rejection at the mere idea. I think that's a modest enough standard that a good portion of any given population should be able to reach, and yet education is failing at achieving that.

cchi_co 2y ago

[dead]

barrenko 2y ago

We are not really taught (thought) to think, we are taught to memorize. Until one actually tries to think, you really can't tell if they're able to do it.

brodo 2y ago

The same goes for language skills, by the way. In the US, 21% of adults are illiterate, and 54% of adults have literacy below sixth-grade level.[1] This is higher than in other developed countries. For example, in Germany, 10% are illiterate, and 32% have literacy below fifth-grade level.[2] General intelligence also seems to have been trending downward since the 1970s (the reverse Flynn Effect)[3]. It has been measured in the US and Europe. So, while it is true that the education system and other factors have an influence, the idea that "everybody is capable of X" is wrong and harmful. It's the equivalent of "nobody needs a wheelchair" or "everybody can see perfectly." People are different. A lot of nerds only hang out with other nerds, which screws up their perception of society. [1]: https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-statistics-2022-2023 https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-s... [2]: https://leo.blogs.uni-hamburg.de https://leo.blogs.uni-hamburg.de [3]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289623000156 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028962...

j2kun 2y ago
What a weird comment. Are you trying to argue by analogy that a decent fraction of the population are not capable of literacy? It seems self-evident that low literacy rates have nothing to do with innate ability. I see no evidence to suggest that math is any different.
crazygringo 2y ago
The idea that 21% of US adults are "illiterate" doesn't mean they can't read, by the way: > English literacy test results from 2014 suggest that 21% of U.S. adults ages 16 to 65 score at or below PIAAC literacy level 1, meaning they have difficulty "[completing] tasks that require comparing and contrasting information, paraphrasing, or making low-level inferences." Included in that 21% is the 4.2% of respondents who were unable to be assessed due to language barriers, cognitive disability, or physical disability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States A lot of people aren't aware that the academic definition of "literacy" was changed around 1950 to no longer refer to "alphabetical literacy", which is still what most people think literacy means (in lay usage). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy And this particular survey ignored people who didn't speak English but were entirely literate in their native language. Which obviously has nothing to do with the educational system or people's intelligence.