Anti-math article in the new yorker | Hacker News Reader

Anti-math article in the new yorker

nymag.com

9 pointsjgamman18 comments

None of the courses are anti-math nor are the course descriptions too absurd once you remember that, like patents, they are written in their own subset of English. The only one that rankled me was the Pomona College class where historic Islam (a monotheistic religion) was turned into a place.

IMHO, the article reflects more on the headline writer's knowledge of mathematics and its influence than on the schools for offering courses which attempt to bridge the gap between cultures. Maybe, if the author had taken a course like the ones described, the headline would have read differently.

The culture of mathematics is important to understanding the field and how to appreciate its beauty and apply it to practical problems. My love and appreciation for mathematics came, in part, from reading every word of James R. Newman's four volume World of Mathematics (Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/World-Mathematics-Four--Set/dp/0486432...) published originally in 1956. It is now published by Dover in paperback and available at O($46). It's not a book to read to learn math, but it is a book to learn mathematical thinking. And while you are in the mood, you might also look at Polya's How To Solve It (Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dst... ), another classic.

WTF? I'm as game as the next privileged anti-establishment dilettante to point fingers and laugh at University establishment, but did these guys even do a Wikipedia search of the "ridiculous" courses they dug up? Statistics? Organic population growth? Topology?? Yeah, complete fluff topics. Morons.

And the other "fluff" courses they cite are largely liberal arts courses that focus on the role of mathematics in their discipline - one on mathematics in theatre, one on getting a grasp on the math referenced by a particular author, etc. It's entirely healthy and reasonable for liberal arts disciplines to examine the role of science and math in art, history and culture.

"This is why Asia is winning, by the way." Winning at what, exactly? What a loaded statement... with absolutely no substance. Also, I'm not all that familiar with the U.S. college system, but if you were highly interested in math and science wouldn't you go to a different kind of university than a liberal arts college (i.e.one with a bigger focus on math, science, engineering)? So what is the relevance of comparing U.S. liberal colleges with 'Asia'?

Not so math-y? Topology? Models of life? The Mathematics of Chance?

For someone not knowing mathematics, topology would probably sound rather weird. But people should know that mathematics is used to model real-life events: How would Models of life be a bad math-class?

The Mathematics of Chance? Probability and statistics has usually been pretty damn important, and it still is.

That's New York magazine, not the New Yorker.

This title is wildly editorialized; someone just make it the real title of the article.

One of these is not like the others...

I imagine a liberal arts major just trying to fulfill their math requirement who ends up in Topology is in for a rude surprise.

Topology is a rather widely studied (and important) field of mathematics. Not too sure why it's on the list..

(edit) #5 seems to be a straightforward topology class as well. Something gives me the feeling the author doesn't actually know much about mathematics.

That is NOT the New Yorker.

I don't see how it's anti-math.

Quoting a bunch of course titles and brief descriptions, many of which anyone who knows anything about mathematics could readily tell are perfectly reasonable, and then saying "This is why Asia is winning, by the way." -- yeah, I can see how you might call that "anti-math".

The last one sounds pretty hokey. All the others, without exception, sound to me like they're probably worth while, or at least courses matching those descriptions could well be.

Oh, and guess what? #7, the one that they quote as talking about "the natural numbers 1, 2, [and] 3", actually says this: "This course will explore the beauty and mystery of mathematics through a study of the patterns and properties of the natural numbers 1, 2, 3, ...." Apparently the author of the idiotic NYMag article is unable to distinguish between "1, 2, 3, and so on" and "1, 2, 3, and no others", even in a context where it's perfectly obvious which is meant. Obviously this is someone I should trust to tell me what mathematics courses are silly and "why Asia is winning".

Meh:

2. Mathematics and Science as Art in Contemporary Theatre: "Playwrights such as Tom Stoppard, Rinne Groff, Michael Frayn, and others have effectively explored mathematical and scientific themes for artistic purposes. Through readings and exercises, and by conducting labs and staging scenes, this class will gain some first-hand insight into the complementary ways in which science and art aim to seek out their respective truths." [Middlebury]

4. Mathematics and Narrative: "Many literary works (Arcadia, Proof, and Uncle Petros and the Goldbach Conjecture) use mathematics as an integral part of their narrative. Movie and television narratives such as Good Will Hunting and Numb3rs are also mathematically based. Nonfiction works about mathematics and mathematical biographies like Chaos, Fermat's Enigma, and A Beautiful Mind provide further examples of the connection between mathematics and narrative. " [Vassar]

You copied out two of the course descriptions and gave us the meaningless syllable "meh" as the sum total of your analysis. That's not insightful. It's not clever. It's not funny. My guess is that you think these are actually arts courses with the word "Mathematics" in the title. If you can't be bothered to actually write out your conclusion, please don't bother at all. Expecting us to guess what you mean is rude and unhelpful.

You guessed correctly. That is what I believe.

Would 6 grafs of exposition about that really improve Hacker News, or is it better to just get to the point?

By "Meh:", I meant, "there might be something to your point, but here is evidence that may contradict it".

I used "meh", as opposed to "you are a complete lunatic", because I do not in fact believe he is a complete lunatic.

You, on the other hand...

;)

I don't really see any problem with those as electives, rather than core math classes. An upperclassman in a humanities major might take one of those, and get some value out of it.

I agree; they sound like interesting English courses. They're very David Foster Wallace-y. They also look like good examples of "courses liberal arts students take to evade math requirements".

Another way to look at it is "a math class they'll be able to use, rather than a math class they won't use".

I tend to agree with the guy from the TED talk posted a few weeks ago who believes that right now, all our basic maths courses build towards calculus, and that's a waste since most people never use it, and the right fix is to refocus on statistics.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com