Traps set by the machine

[Verbal Mike]

Look, whatever, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about something you admit you didn't actually read entirely through. There's no point in that kind of argument.

[Requia ☣]

Usefulness of (math) education and (math) teachers aside, the guy has a point in that very very little real math is thought in those classes.

[LMNO]

Because "real" math is only possible after you learn the language and processes.


A physics professor once said to me, "I love math.  But I hate using numbers."

[Verbal Mike]

Thing is, much of the math nomenclature taught in classrooms simply doesn't exist outside those classrooms. People are taught literally useless information simply because it can be classed together with potentially useful information.

[LMNO]

The same could be said of grammar.

[Verbal Mike]

Yeah, probably. But I don't know shit about English-language grammatical nomenclature.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

OK, as someone who simply did not bother going to school after 3rd grade I have some input, here. Which is that as far as I can see, most of high school is a time-wasting exercise because I learned high school math in 5 weeks. All of it. 3 hours a week.

[Triple Zero]

Thing is, much of the math nomenclature taught in classrooms simply doesn't exist outside those classrooms. People are taught literally useless information simply because it can be classed together with potentially useful information.

sounds to me you think this information is "literally useless" and "doesn't exist outside the classroom" because you didn't get it.

i know a shitload of math, and hardly any of it except for the most obscure stuff is "literally useless"

being things like, decimals of Pi after the 50th, the banach-tarski paradox and uhhh well i suppose the theory behind automated theorem-proving is pretty much useless since it's not really getting anywhere [btw i haven't learned about either of these three things in school]

but the things they teach in school (at least the things they taught *me* in school) that are not part of a masters curriculum in mathematics, are in fact quite useful.

not to everybody, i agree. but just like most stuff i learned in geography and a lot of stuff in biology that just falls into the category "nice to know", is useless knowledge to me now. however, in my university study (computer sciences), it would have been highly inconvenient if i hadn't possessed the required basic math skills like differentiation, integration, trigonometry, matrices, solving of equations with multiple unknowns, etc. because my first year was 80% similar with the mathematics students first year, and they were just building on knowledge that was assumed as known from highschool.

had i picked biology, planology or environmental sciences for my study, then the stuff i learned about biology and geography would have come in very useful, and my mathematical background less so.

point is, and remains, i'm glad i know all this stuff. even the biology or geography stuff. cause it means i can call bullshit on people telling me bullshit.

[LMNO]

You can do matricies?


Fuck.  That shit's rough.

[Requia ☣]

Thing is, much of the math nomenclature taught in classrooms simply doesn't exist outside those classrooms. People are taught literally useless information simply because it can be classed together with potentially useful information.

Who said math was supposed to be useful?  Math exists for math's sake.  The engineers and the physicists and the black chamber people found uses later.

[Golden Applesauce]

I would say that ordinary people need at least algebra and formal logic even if they're going into a of non-math field.  Euclidean geometry would probably also be useful.  I personally am glad I got the opportunity to do linear algebra and multivariable calc in high school, although I recognize most people will never get to use it.  A basic understanding of statistics would be nice as well.

As far as sciences, everybody should have enough knowledge to critically evaluate "scientific" claims and identify stuff like the placebo effect, recognize that anyone trying to sell them a perpetual motion machine is full of shit, etc.  Everybody needs to be able to recognize a falsifiable theory, needs to understand the concept of a control group, etc.

Basics of biology, chemistry, physics, and psychology are also incredibly important.  If I had dollar for every time our newspaper printed absolute baloney about DNA or CO2 or whatever the scientific controversy of the day is...

Psychology is important because if you have a mind, you ought to know how it functions.  Knowledge of cognitive biases and social influence is critical.  We're talking bystander effect, pluralistic ignorance, conformity.  Everybody should know about the Asch Conformity Experiments and the Milgram experiments.

(True story - one of my physics professors was appointed to a national panel on energy.  This is what he had to say: "I was attending our meeting in August, and we were listening to the Vice Secretary of Energy give a presentation on burning Natural Gas as a clean alternative to other fuels. He kept mentioning how BURNING NATURAL GAS WOULD PRODUCE NO GREENHOUSE GASES.")

[P3nT4gR4m]

Education is irrelevant Wikipedia has all the answers you evar need

[Golden Applesauce]

Oh yeah, and the ability to read Wikipedia and actually check the footnotes and page histories.  That needs to be taught in schools ASAP along with critically evaluating claims.

[Triple Zero]

Who said math was supposed to be useful?  Math exists for math's sake.  The engineers and the physicists and the black chamber people found uses later.

[citation needed]

[Requia ☣]

Hrm...

See the Turing Machine.  A theoretical, impossible to build (or even approximate at the time) construct that was invented for the purpose of proving that some problems cannot be solved by logic.

That the concepts laid out became critical to computing and modern cryptography had nothing to do with Turing's original intent.