This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 206

Thread images: 8

Thread images: 8

File: 51SlpNQaEkL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (22KB, 230x346px) Image search:
[iqdb]
[SauceNao]
[Google]

22KB, 230x346px

>Post-Modernism and irrational Critical Theory arguments are infecting every one of the social sciences

How long before STEM fields are next? How long before Engineering departments require "Critical Engineering Theory" and "Postcolonial Engineering" as courses? How long before Mathematics departments require "Gender Theory in the Practice of Mathematics"?

>>

>dat paranoia

>>

>>6320647

>Post-Modernism and irrational Critical Theory arguments are infecting every one of the social sciences

No they're not

>>

>>

>>

OP, you're a fuckwit. Please leave.

>>

>Are Science and Mathematics socially constructed

Yes.

Mathematics as we understand it should not be beholden to rigid interpretations such as 2 +2 = 4. This entire argument is a social construct based on an appeal to authority fallacy. Let us move away from the fallacious argument presented by virulent proponents of the status quo that this is the only interpretation for the results of such a formula.

>>

>>6320654

You're right. They're already completely infected.

How is STEM able to resist, guys?

Anth major here.

>>

>>6320660

> have two eggs in a basket

> put two more eggs into basket

> have four eggs

> FUCKING AUTHORITY!!!!

Disgusting.

>>

>>6320668

>that social conditioning

>>

That won't happen. It would be a threat to state capitalism.

Identity politics will continue to be used for fascist goals by academic and bureaucratic functionaries, such as making video games worse and discouraging it as a hobby, so people can be more productive worker ants. Or highlighting wrong-doing by sports stars. All cultural pursuits that aren't seen as being in line with what is best for the state goals (Such as those intended to increase tolerance, like Gone Home the video game) are discouraged. Most don't do it on purpose of course. They're not sophisticated enough to know why they have goals or why they get funding for their inane research projects, just that they do.

Any attacks on science would be to make it more accessible, which would be a state goal, not destroy it.

>>

>>6320660

>avant-garde bait

>>

>Are mathematics and science socially constructed

Yes. Many people are blinded by a faith in science. Science is a modern religion and a very exclusive one. You could call it "scientism". What most believers in scientism don't realize is that science and the unquestioning belief in science has been used to justify atrocities throughout history such as the genocide of racial minorities in Nazi Germany.

>>

>>6320660

What? Have you ever seriously studied constructions of arithmetic? Such preconceptions are explicitly acknowledged and then tossed out in favor of a formal system which does the same things.

>>

>>6320698

Not who you're replying to but

>placing unquestioning faith in formal systems without acknowledging their inherent contradictions and flaws

>>

Not sure if this counts but I had to do a group project for a class on how recently published Biology textbooks reinforce sexist norms and how Feminist philosophers' arguments can be used to critique the "facts" in Biology textbooks.

>>

>>6320706

Baby, bathwater, and so on and so on.

Show me both the unquestioning faith and the inherent contradictions and flaws or GTFO

>>

>>6320711

That sounds like torture.

>>

>>6320706

>inherent contradictions and flaws

you can prove zfc is inconsistent?

>>

>Are science and mathematics socially constructed ?

No. Modern science doesn't rely on any social construction, as evidenced by the fact that sciencists are automaton that never communicate with each other and don't use language.

In fact, mathematics is given straight by God to mathematicians, and they have nothing else to do but writing down what God send them.

>>

>>6320730

>No. Modern science doesn't rely on any social construction

Hahahahaha that Scientism

>>

>>6320720

But can you prove it is consistent :^)

>>

>>6320734

It's funny, because I took care to make my sarcasm very obvious, even adding the "don't use language" bit which should have been an instant giveaway, yet there are still people on this board simpleminded enough to take it as face value.

I have to admit I'm surprised.

>>

>>6320647

Dum dum unsophisticates ITT who couldn't grasp elementary set theory at gunpoint.

Disgusting.

>>

>>6320730

>In fact, mathematics is given straight by God to mathematicians, and they have nothing else to do but writing down what God send them.

Cool sarcasm. However, many if not most mathematicians except for a small handful who dare to question Mathematics' basic assumptions actually act like this. They act like Mathematics and Mathematical formulas are inviolable fact. Anyone who cares enough to use a post-modern theoretical lens to analyze mathematics knows that nothing could be further from the truth.

>>

>>6320742

He probably just stopped reading after the first few words. Shameful display.

>>

>>6320680

making video games worse; the fascist conspiracy

>>

>>6320736

i was waiting for you to publish your proof

so that i could copy it and get my fields medal :^)

>>

I had a classmate who said she wanted to go into Mathematics in order to look at imaginary numbers through a lens of Marxist analysis. She had an elaborate plan for how she'd use Marxism to critique the inequality she said was inherent to Mathematics.

She enrolled in a Mathematics graduate program and was accepted, but got kicked out after a semester.

>>

>>6320769

fucking fascist mathematicians

>>

>>6320769

Doy. Had a few of those types in math undergrad. If Cal II doesn't scrub them out, the first class that requires proof writing does.

>>

>>6320667

>What is this, a major for Anths?

>>

>>6320790

>A major for Ants

No, that's Antomology

>>

>>6320790

anthropology

>>

>>6320754

Its a system of material relations where people simply play their part, frequently without knowing it.

A conspiracy must be consciously advanced.

Read Marx bro.

>>

>>6320748

> However, many if not most mathematicians except for a small handful who dare to question Mathematics' basic assumptions actually act like this.

No. Poll 100 mathematicians, you'll get perhaps a dozen of different opinions including "I don't know", "I don't care", "This is an important problem but not a mathematical one", intuitionism and computationalism (however you call it). Mathematicians have trouble agreeing on what tool they are allowed to use, mostly they use them as long as they need them for what they want, so it's a rather pragmatical (in the common sense) approach to the problem.

>They act like Mathematics and Mathematical formulas are inviolable fact.

You know nothing about history of mathematics or how mathematicians think about their craft. The first thing to know is there have been controversies for more than a century and there still are today. Brouwer and Lebesgue were defiant of the principle of excluded middle term. Contemporary mathematicians are disagreeing on wether a computer provides more trustworthy or less trustworthy than a human.

Finally, and most importantly, my post wasn't about how mathemticians see the "reality" of mathematical facts, so your criticism is pretty much off-point. I was talking about maths being a social practice grounded on social constructs and relying on arbitrary or semi-arbitrary conventions, and any mathematician who ever worked in research is conscious of that.

>>

>>6320736

I believe it was Conway who proved it can't be proven inconsistent or consistent.

>>

>>6320748

>However, many if not most mathematicians except for a small handful who dare to question Mathematics' basic assumptions actually act like this

mmyeah. gonna need some citations or evidence to back up that claim

>>

>>6320760

The only person who can make such a proof is Jacob Barnett and he isn't on 4chan anymore.

>>

>>

>>6320802

my bad, after consulting the reference I had in mind, I appear to have been thinking of Cohen proving that the Continuum Hypothesis could not be proven with zfc.

Now that I'm warmed up a little I recall the often misunderstood Incompleteness Theorem of Godel, a corollary of which is that we're all idiots for having this discussion.

>>

>>6320746

Just because someone can grasp an explanation doesn't mean that explanation isn't wrong.

>>6320680

Mathematics often serves as intellectual justification for authoritarian measures on both small and large scales. Therefore, even if those Statistics are "correct" according to mathematicians, it is up to social critics to prove the mathematics wrong.

>>

>>6320826

Elementary set theory is specifically constructed to be as reliable as possible. You really owe it some examination and thought before dismissing it like that.

>>

>>6320826

> it is up to social critics to prove the mathematics wrong.

which isn't possible, because the humanities and mathematics do not share the same methodology.

>>

>>6320836

Elementary Set Theory is very open to critique that undermines its basic, often socially regressive or oppressive, assumptions.

>>

>>6320840

>which isn't possible, because the humanities and mathematics do not share the same methodology.

This is how mathematicians can get away with murder if they want

"I am objectively write because Math can be proven and can't be argued with"

That is the reasoning of a dictator

>>

>>6320848

>This is how mathematicians can get away with murder if they want

as they often do!

>>

>>6320746

Not him, but no one literally gives a fuck about the foundations of mathematics within the mathematics community. And nor does anyone care about your ability to prove trivial set-theoretic theorems ITT.

Why don't you stop invoking and babbling about set theory, but speak of mathematics in a more general way.

>>

>>6320840

I see two points where mathematics might be attacked by a student of the humanities. Its axioms and rules of reasoning and the ability of phenomena in the real world to meet the axioms required to apply mathematical theories.

>>

>>6320821

Iirc we haven't managed to prove wether ZFC is consistent, inconsistent, and wether its (in)consistence can be proved or not.

>>

>>6320826

>Mathematics often serves as intellectual justification for authoritarian measures on both small and large scales. Therefore, even if those Statistics are "correct" according to mathematicians

Actually, that justification often relies on a misunderstanding of maths on the part of the authorities. So even the mathematicians have a role to play in dismantling misconceptions about the "truth" of mathematics.

>>

>>6320843

By all means, give us a demonstration.

You'll find the axioms in chapter two, which begins at page 17.

http://sistemas.fciencias.unam.mx/~lokylog/images/stories/Alexandria/Teoria%20de%20Conjuntos%20Basicos/Enderton%20H.B_Elements%20of%20Set%20Theory.pdf

>>

>>6320852

You're being a bit too bold, there are various people working on logic and produced mathematically interesting result, and every mathematician and their mother have their little opinion about what maths are grounded on and what they should be grounded on.

But it's true that mathematicians mostly want to use, contemplate and understand math, not to logically found it.

>>

>Mathematicians argue you can't divide by zero

>In real life, numbers are actually divisible by zero

This proves that mathematics is a social construct. Mathematicians are simply not very open-minded or willing to consider alternatives to their rigid mindset.

>>

>>6320853

>Its axioms and rules of reasoning

as somebody else has said 10 times, this is the foundations of mathematics and most people do not care about them. if you change them, you are simply doing a different form of mathematics

>the ability of phenomena in the real world to meet the axioms required to apply mathematical theories.

this is for natural scientists to decide

>>

>>6320869

in projective geometry you can divide by zero

mathematics is revolutionary and proletariat friendly

>>

>>6320883

lol mathematics objectively disproves the assumptions of Marxism

Nice bait though

>>

>>6320869

They don't say that you can't, they merely say that such an operation has not been defined.

"Mathematicians are simply not very open-minded or willing to consider alternatives to their rigid mindset." They are typically quite open minded, but have spent thousands of hours examining and ruling out alternatives and have made prosperous careers by cultivating their mindset, which I think rather justifies dismissal of your no doubt ill-conceived arguments.

>>

I don't believe in math or science. I really can't stand the kind of neckbearded atheists who think that science is real and not an elaborate pile of bullshit.

>>

>>6320910

d'aww

>>

>>6320910

math and science kills fasciscts

burn your fucko books and join the vanguard of the proletariat

>>

>>6320893

This was very obviously a joke ("in reality numbers a divisible by zero").

>>

>>6320921

>the only two extremes on the political spectrum are extremist far rightists and extremist far leftists

gdiaf

>>

>>6320924

How is that a joke and not a valid critique of the field of Mathematics?

>>

mathematics is unprovable, like the existence of god.

>>

>>6320668

What are integers? What are imaginary numbers?

>>

>>6320924

Depending on your powerlevel in math, you can divide by zero.

>>

>>6320801

No responses? Dum dums BTFO

>>

>>6321025

>"I don't have an adequate critique of my own so I will call people who put forth evidence that disagrees with my stance 'dum dums'" - You

>>

>>6320852

> speak of mathematics in a general way

> speak about mathematics in a sensical way

choose 1

>>

>>6320861

Heh, of course you'll get no reply. These dum dum philosophers couldn't be bothered to study the thing they are trying to overthrow.

>>

>>6320826

Yes, but if someone can't (or won't) grasp the explanation, their critique of the explanation is worthless. Like trying to critique a book you haven't read.

>>

>>

Maths and Physics doesn't care about power struggles to do their thing.

Engineering in the other hand... You can see how everything has to be "ecological" or it isn't effective.

>>

>>6320660

2+2 = 1 in Z/3Z and 2+2 = 0 in Z/2Z.

>>

>>6321085

yeah but 4=1=2+2 in Z/3Z and 4=0=2+2 in Z/2Z

>>

Nigga How Can You Critique Something From A Social Standpoint If Maths Is Done By Autists

>>

>>6320680

>anyone cares about video games

ok ked

>>

>>6321109

top kek

>>

>>6321085

>>6321095

For me, you're actually giving as example as how the discourse of >>6320660 can improve our vision even in the discourse in mathematics. Of course 1+1=2, but that's just an interpretation about the whole part, that is founded in deeper waters than in "it's the only interpretation of the formula". We should understand that when you're 1+1=2 you're implying a whole universe.

And I'm talking about epistemology, not about social activism.

>>

>>6320683

MATHS DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH SCIENCE

FUCK MATHEMATICIANS DOESN'T LOOK INTO REALITY

THEY'RE NOT DOOMED TO FAIL

>>

ITT: People who don't know shit about mathematics but still critique it

Can confirm, I'm an autistic Mathematician

>>

>>6320754

my keks

>>

>>6320801

Thank you for this post.

>>

>>6320647

Hume, Russell, Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend.

Fuck off.

Read them.

Come back.

>>

>>6320683

>has been used to justify atrocities

>implying it wouldn't have happened if it wasn't justified

Politician and power doesn't need arguments bb :^)

>>

>>6321208

I know that feel bro.

I often feel the urge about make understand to some scientific/mathematicians buddies how this kind of discourse can be also helpful, that can help us to understand even more our reality. But then I come to /lit/ and I see that people who actually question mathematics are stupid fucks who doesn't know a shit about them, and I understand why some people could act as 'sciencetists', because sometimes, you guys who haven't study a fucking single subject about science or math (specially this second one) are fucking annoying.

>>

>>6321109

lol ahahah

>>

>>6321258

>this kind of discourse can be also helpful

How? What good does mixing the perspectives actually do?

If we applied the standards and principles of scientific investigation to the humanities we would have to throw most of it out. I don't see how the reverse would be any less destructive.

>>

>>6321208

If you're autistic nothing that you do is worth considering.

>>

It's already happening OP.~~I don't think anyone took this lady seriously. She was practically crucified over this ridiculousness iirc.~~

>>

>>6320786

yeah all the wannabe mathematicians end up flushed out whenever they take their first discrete mathematics/intro to higher math/proofs whatever your university offers.

Their self-esteem drops immensely once they figure out calc is for plebians if you're seeing it from the standpoint of an engineer (plug in shit into the equation and feel like a big man because your answer took a whole page).

>>

>>6321275

I'm just saying that if you can understand their methods of reasoning and why they can say that, maybe that can be helpful to understand any method of reasoning at all, and in last instance to your research, way to address problems. In the same way they should understand science, but no apply it to their method of analysis.

Of course I'm not saying that mathematical research as anything to do with social activism.

>>

>>6320680

I sure hope this is high quality bait.

>>

>>6320746

They don't need to understand, DONT YOU UNDERSTAND!

they just say things over and over. They never did sociology or philosophy, they never did history. they never did anything!

you think STEM is safe, you are litterally the last person in the

'when they came for X i did not speak because i was not X' line.

When its Stem's turn there will be nobody left.

Enjoy your mandatory sensitivity training in math.

>>

>>6320866

Filthy applied mathematicians

>>

>>6320680

Video games make more money than movies at this point. I would love to see the mental back flips you need to do in order to argue that this is not good for a capitalist economy.

>>

>>6320801

Godel would agree with your last part, and if he isn't a badass mathematician, I don't know who is.

>>

>>6321298

What do you expect people to actually do? The strength of STEM is that it emphasizes objective results over personal interpretation (the word is emphasize), whereas the arts tend to deny that objective reality even exists, if it did exist you couldn't know it, and if you try knowing it wrong you're literally Hitler. Any time scientiff thinking seems to cross boundaries people scream bloody murder. How then should the community speak out in any effective way?

>>

>>6321309

Literally no one in my family, even my younger cousins, nephews and nieces who are the age demographic most video games are marketed to, and almost none of the people I am friends with have ever played a console video game

>>

In general, social sciences are subjective, STEM aren't. You can look at muh oppression themes in Russian literature rationally because art is open to interpretation.

>>

>>6321362

>Literature is open to interpretation

>Authorial intent doesn't matter

lol how can you actually believe this

>>

>>6321367

>implying authorial intent is always clear

>>

>>6321367

>Authorial intent matters.

Death of the Author. Intent only matters in that I can claim that an author's intent matches whatever thesis I decide, or whatever pet theory the professor wants to push.

>>

scientific "facts" can easily be disproven

>>

>>6321446

THE RICH ARE KILLING THE CHILDREN

>>

>>6321446

THE RICH ARE KILLING CHILDREN

>>

>>6321367

>authorial intent matters

i intend for my post to be an absolute refutation of everything you believe to be true.

>>

>>6321309

Playing video games is an act of capitalism that is seen as having a detriment to the rest of state capitalism. Like gambling.

If you think video games is bad because its a waste of time or not morally edifying enough, you're supporting fascist culture and probably don't even realize it.

>>

>>6321627

>everything I don't like is fascist

It's like you're pissing out of your mouth instead of talking

>>

>>6321634

Sorry if I just triggered you.

>>

sjws will get stuck on calculus 2 and thus be unable to learn enough math to mount an assault

>>

To anyone seriously interested in learning about the socially constructed foundations of mathematics, check out this video series:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91c5Ti6Ddio

This man is the foremost researcher in foundational mathematics active today.

>>

>>6321109

How Can Math Be Real If Our Minds Aren't Real

>>

>>6321280

I am speechless, All I have learned from Transport Phenomena is gone into the trash, this lady have opened my eyes.

>>

>>6321692

>Old white man reinforcing masculinist/patriarchal frameworks

I don't think so

>>

>>6321710

>using patriarchy ironically

>>

>>6321901

It's an easy poorly chosen buzzword to mock

>>

>>6321360

Fucking mormons.

>>

>>6322000

>/lit/ - Literature

>where everything I don't take seriously is a buzzword

>>

>>6320647

Critical Theory only makes sense in the humanities, and no critical theorist has ever denied that. So, the answer is never.

>>

>>6320647

>muh slippery slope bullshittery

Blame it on cultural marxism. The jews are after you.

>>

>>6320801

>You know nothing about history of mathematics or how mathematicians think about their craft. The first thing to know is there have been controversies for more than a century and there still are today. Brouwer and Lebesgue were defiant of the principle of excluded middle term. Contemporary mathematicians are disagreeing on wether a computer provides more trustworthy or less trustworthy than a human.

the thing is that this is not really taught, not even in math class

also, you can clearly see strong positions, just a century ago, about the famous excluded middle. The dispute is over, but most of the work is really still in classical maths. I think that those using maths as a tool, once the theories are passed won to physics and so on, forget a bit about those questions

>>

>>6322951

>forget a bit about those questions

and it becomes detrimental when those people talk in public conferences

>>

>Post-Modernism and irrational Critical Theory arguments are infecting every one of the social sciences

No, that stuff peaked in the 90's. I don't think you actually are an academic.

>>

>>6320683

>atrocities are bad

Why can't I hold all those spooks?

>>

>>6320769

Was it because she was a womyn?

>>

>>6321710

you forgot to mention that he was probably straight

>>

>>6322966

There are still people advocating this kind of approach and trying to spin it as the only true proper academic interpretation

>>

>>6321280

For more laughs/toe-curling see http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.html

>>

>>6320647

Postmodernism alread lost the science wars dude.

That was the 90s.

>>

>>6323153

Umm it's still the 90s actually

>>

>>6323153

>was the 90s

>was

Check your calendar. It's March 27th, 1998 today.

>>

>>6320668

That's not how math works you faggot. Math does not appeal to the universe. Go back to your pleb shit physics

>>

>>6320680

My favourite part of this b8 is how you subtly imply that gone home deserved more praise than it got.

>>

>>6323704

>Math does not appeal to the universe

>Actually believing this

>>

>>6320647

>that title

I dub that book a meme book

>>

Are social constructs a social construct?

>>

>>6325300

yes

>>

>>6321677

> algebra

FTFY

>>

>Are science and mathematics socially constructed?

Yes.

>>

>>6326321

I don't see how anyone could say otherwise

>>

>>6326322

PURE IDEOLOGY

>>

>>6326342

>science and math are socially constructed

>science and math are not socially constructed

equally pure ideological statements, bub

>>

>>6326351

Depends on the mode of construction. The technoscience thesis, for example, is fundamentally historically materialist. So a critique which was social and abolished science would demonstrate that science is socially constructed. Such a critique might look like the discovery of man's real freedom in history as the pursuit of self-actualisation.

Go home little man and look after your wife.

>>

>>6326428

>man's real freedom in history as the pursuit of self-actualisation

pure, unsoiled ideology

>>

>>6320801

>They act like Mathematics and Mathematical formulas are inviolable fact.

Hey you cant blame people for assuming this because this is hows its taught in American high school. Hell, I got put down by the teachers more than once because I wanted to understand the theory behind why we were supposed to solve problems certain ways. I mean fuck I learn better that way.

>>

>people are still buying into the fasle science/humanities dichotomy

ugh

>>

>>6326667

That's what happens when property no longer exists: the ideological itself is abolished.

>>

>>6320647

>that title

Weird question. How in the hell would they not be socially constructed? Do test tubes grow on trees?

>>

>>6321692

From what I've read existing forms of logic such as lambda calculus can already compute all of what he is talking about using fewer axioms.

It's also interesting that in lamda calc (and the system that guy uses) numbers and if statements etc are all expressed using indertiminates that are left up to the user to interpret.

>>

>Taking an Anthropology of Science class

>Also taking some Physics courses for a minor at the same time

>Find out from my Physics prof that all of the science departments at my uni think the Humanities classes on science or math (History of Mathematics, etc.) are a joke

>>

>>6327118

They're socially constructed in that students are expected to learn rote formulas, memorize them, and not question them or attempt to disprove them

>>

>>6327413

>memorize

>not question

Confirmed for never taking any serious math or physics class

>>

>>6327413

Eh? Even if that were true, what definition of 'socially constructed' does it match? I are confus.

>>

>>6327470

>Eh? Even if that were true, what definition of 'socially constructed' does it match? I are confus.

I think the first flavour in the definition of some social construction is the notice that there are trends. And there are trends in mathematics and physics, logic ; everybody knows this. Concerning some prejudices, they are minimal I think, expect that the students are not really told that there are other logics than classical logic for instance, which leads to different mathematics, typically in topology.

The question of what is a number, like the autralian teacher publishes about, is not dealt with at all.

Amongst the mathematicians, I do not think the majority believes that the finitary numbers are interesting since they found it sterile. (the question is what is the number 10^10^10, does it even exist ?)

Going back the the teaching, not many students reflect on the quantifiers for instance, and what is an admissible quantification, how to apprehend a number, how to furnish an adequate proof and so on.

All of these matters are left out and it is up to the student to look at them, once he hears about them. The thing is that they must not be prejudiced once they look at less trendy fields than classical maths. But ofc, it is hard to change your believes once you have been trained for years to actually love the axioms you have always used.

>>

>>6321309

Making video games worse though, not discouraging it as a hobby, would be very in line with capitalism, it's called casualization and it's happening constantly.

>>

>>6320660

I hope this is satire because if not you need to be punched through the eye socket.

>>

>>6327522

yeah, filthy casuals

>>

>>6327580

This is /lit/, so why would that be satire?

>>

>>6327444

Physics, I can see.

Maths however is pretty axiomatic in most instances.

>>

>>6328319

That's the problem

>>

>Implying the arbitrary divide between Stem and humanities isn't benefiting the status quo by keeping either side from knowing enough to change something.

>Implying this antagonism and fear mongeringdoesn't play straight into their hands.

"Let none ignorant of geometry enter." was the inscription on the entrance to Plato's academy. It used to be that to be a true patrician you had to study both. The way things are STEMfags are too ignorant to question the system they live under, while humanities fags are too superficial to change the system even though they oppose it. Meanwhile the rich and powerful (who don't really study either because they are don't need a college education to inherit daddies business) are too dumb to keep things under control.

If we don't re-unite science and humanities, our civilization will be in grave danger.

>>

>>6329564

Damn, dude, agree so hard.

I mean, biggest explosion of knowledge and freedom in last 500 years (...arguably) was the Renaissance.

When we say Renaissance man, what do we mean? Google says: "a person with many talents or areas of knowledge."

People who made the most impact were very well rounded in the arts AND sciences.

>>

>>6321190

You shouldn't be here man, you seem to have some wits.

>>

In Sweden we are editing our physics text book to become more gender inclusive, mainly by questioning patriarchy in physics. With the sciences of poststructuralism and postmodernism we problematize the use of certain words and terms that could be negative towards women or minorities, some we change and others we scrap all together.

There is also talks about removing some white cis males from the history books and adding PoC and women to make it more diverse, even though it would only harm actual history.

>>

>>6329620

In Canada milk comes in bags.

>>

>>6329620

how could you possibly rewrite physics to remove patriarchy?

>ball rolls down hill and converts gravitational energy to kinetic energy

is that the big bad evil gravity working against the strong independent ball?

>>

>>6329750

Abandon this turd of a thread. No one is providing any evidence to back up their claims, it's a circlejerk of shitposting.

>>

>>6329784

As you should have known from the first post that made unreferenced claims, claims that are so unlikely to be untrue, and that should be known to be untrue by anyone with the least HASS knowledge.

Oh no, lets >169 replies and 5 images emitted.

>>

>>6329564

>whining about the rich and powerful like a spoiled teenager

Nowhere was a Marxist interpretation of the topic of this thread implied.

>>

>>6329620

>poststructuralism and postmodernism

>sciences

Pick one, and only one

>>

>>6330049

Oh - hahaha, so you claim I am just not familiar enough with the jargon - that is, I have not yet ascended the Mystery sufficiently so that I might glimpse on the Truth (or whatever word may be fashionable to capitalize among the bleeding edge of Continental thinkers)! Well, that loftiness of Mystery is an immensely convenient position in which to place yourself, but you know you can only be in it if you've actually attained it! So let's see, what terms of the Mystery might elude me in your post? Perhaps you claim I misunderstand the meaning of "hegemonic subject," but I assure you I have not - and indeed, a great deal of its meaning can be told from the context of your post, you dummy! I thought the point of these Mystery terms was that only the initiated could understand them! The point is defeated if you allude to its meaning actually in the post - you make a mockery of your Postmodern peerage, thou vulgar pleb! So it is quite clear we hear basically mean "sovereign subject," but with a certain added phenomenological sovereignty, so that we now feel urged to replace the milder "sovereign" with the overblown, Grecian "HEGEMON". So I guess we are here to understand that this is a bit of a solipsistic entity here, with a certain amount of control (or HEGEMONIA, as we may prefer) - or at least a feeling of control - over its own phenomenology. What a concept! Perhaps you think I misunderstand "psyche." But so do you, because "psyche" approaches the vaguest term in the English language. In fact, nobody understands it. So what is it? Where is the Mystery? How might I ascend? You direct me towards academia, but how will the doctors actually help me? Where am I to go?! What am I to do?! Am I forever to wallow in the swampy putridness, looking up with envy and longing at the lofty heights of the Postmodern Mystery? Derrida in adjutorium meum!

>>

>>6329564

Most millionares in the US today are selfmade and did not inherit their wealth.

Fuck off commie scum

>>

>>6330520

Nice job missing that person's point by the way. Also, what about all the children of the self-made millionaires of the US today?

>>

>>6330083

tl;dr

>>

>>6330527

>makes false assertions to support his point

>bitches when called on it

What about them? You have a problem with freedom to give your money to anyone you wish to give it to? What, you propose we re-distribute the wealth instead, you commiefag? Do you bitch at people inheriting houses and small amounts of wealth too?

If they're incapable of taking care of their wealth they'll lose it like many have, if they're capable of taking care of it then they deserve to keep it.

>>

>>6330520

>/pol/ the post

Obviously has no clue as to what he's talking about. If they're not inheriting a business they're inheriting a network or something. Do you honestly think transitions between social classes is really that fluid?

>>

>math major going postgrad

>cry at night because there is no reactionary perspective of math

>math professors are generally inclined to physics & sciences

>no one understands it as the purest form of self-overcoming

>no one believes we are continuing an universal, eternal tradition

>G-grothedieck, I promise to make you proud ;_;

>>

>>6330552

Yes, since most millioners are self made, according to your train of logic most would be inheritence millioners if transition between social classes would not be that fluid.

Is there a system in place that prevents transition to different social classes? Do you need a noble title to own land or operate a buissness? My older borther went form living in a 40sq meter apartment in a family of 3 brothers to owning his own buissnes and living in a 400k house with nothing but elementary education in a span of 10 years.

Keep blaiming the rich and "social immobility" meanwhile 2nd generation asian immgirants in the US outperform whites. Talk about social classes and fluidity, faggot.

>>

>>6330569

Thanks for the anecdotes, friend. Where exactly are you getting that most millionaires are self made? My father owned his own business, do you know how he built it up? Friends.

>>

>>6330520

>Most millionares in the US today are selfmade and did not inherit their wealth.

the inheritance of wealth through the company was a butthurting thing the liberals and yet when it is no longer exists, they still manage to whine

>>

>>6330564

>grothedieck

have you read à la poursuite des champs ?

what fields do you like ?

anyway, do you believe that it is good to separate so strongly maths and philosophy and physics ?

>>

>>6330580

>Friends

Oh, yeah, that's exclusive to rich people.

>Sixty-seven percent of high-net-worth Americans are self-made millionaires, according to the survey. Only 8 percent inherited their wealth. One third of the millionaires surveyed were women and half of them made their own fortunes.

>One third of the wealthy respondents were born outside the U.S. or were first-generation U.S. citizens.

http://www.fa-mag.com/news/most-millionaires-self-made--study-says-14565.html

There are many like it, use google. I also like how you bitch about "anecdotes", which are completely relevant here since you're bitching about social immobility, and then counter with an anecdote.

>>

>>6330520

Slave owners worked hard to take the products of the slaves` labour. Why do you capitalist scum want to take away their wealth?

>>

>>6330599

Slavery is illegal, get fucked commiefag with your shit tier arguments.

>>

>>6330596

I only have a superficial understanding of stack scheme and motive, so I haven't read that. I swear you were the one who posted the grad books the other day? I am starting grad now.

I am too pleb to do algebraic geometry, what do you think about graph theory?

Historically the discipline was indistinguishable from physics up to the works of Gauss, and I'd consider Frege, Principia and that post-1900 development of foundational logic to be a math-philosophy interaction. So they provide tremendous benefits for sure.

But physics, philosophy and even CS don't have the cute quirks that comes with rigorous proving and being raped by the slightest misinterpretation of a statement, ya know? Their value to math has always been as a source of mathematical intuition (von Neumann wrote quite explicitly about this), not the actual deduction.

Then I consider the separations necessary, on the grounds that mathematical rigor should remain 'uncontaminated' (so to speak).

>>

>>6330648

right the mathematical method should remain the same, but the inspiration should really come from other fields.

For instance, in CS/ CS-maths/theoretical CS (choose the term) you have good work on lambda calculus enlightening so parts of maths, or Homotopy Type Theory and so on.

today those people constitute a minority and are put in the CS departments where they remain a minority; even though they do something that approaches far more maths than the majority of those in CS composed of computer geeks building robots and what not.

In private institutes, these borders are suppressed physically and the works of one group can influence the work another group, typically by attending conferences about a subject that is not yours.

To keep also a strong cleavage (physically) does not favour the improvement of the other discipline in rigour. The physicist in public universities could benefit from the rigour of the math guys if they meet more often. It becomes the problem of the chicken and the egg.

>>

>>6330901

how do you stay motivated while studying graduate math?

Too bad there will never be /math/ and we will never see Terence Tao shitposting about prime conjectures.

>>

>>6324188

But he is right.

In fact, maths appeals to our most 'inner' knowledge. We don't observe the universe to make math. You just sit on your desk and try to come out with the solution.

I'm talking about pure math, not physics or any other science. It's quite similar to meditation, in fact...

>>

>>6320668

What about adding 2 billion + 2 billion? Where are you going to find that many eggs?

>>

Are there really people here who believe that mathematics are a tool of authority and are a rigid social construct that perpetuates the ideologies of the elites? I don't understand what the hell is going on in this thread.

>>

>>6320711

how did you write it? honest or swallowing your pride?

>>

>>6330552

The most ridiculous thing about self-proclaimed communists on the internet is how furiously they try to strawman anyone who doesn't agree with them as a brainwashed right winger and/or fascist

It's a bit ridiculous and pathetic to watch

>>

>>6330922

>Too bad there will never be a /math/

/sci/ literally encompasses science and math

>>

>>6330901

>To keep a strong cleavage

>cleavage

lol you said cleavage

>>

>>6321010

Has nothing to do with what is generally understood by "in reality". An in most cases that "dividing by zero" is a sloppy name for a convention or a bijective relationship between two sets that have an infinite and a zero.

>>

>>6321360

not the original guy, but even though I can see what makes you think that way. the behaviour of the general populace is probably more important than that of your relatives.

>>

>>6330564

But late Grothendieck would call you an idiot for thinking mathematics in themselves are important at all. Go meditate, homebrew some alcohol, sell homegrown vegetables, and set fire on your house to distract the firemen every once in a while.

>>

>>6331594

Grocery store, duh.

>>

>>6322013

Most of my family is either atheist, agnostic or unitarian actually

Thread posts: 206

Thread images: 8

Thread images: 8

If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.

This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.