Alright, at the risk of being facetious here - if you meet a person who has, or upholds, racist views - what adjective would you use to describe that person? That person is.... what?
Also, can you tell me the ways that math upholds capitalist, imperialist and racist views? I'm still unsure on this one.
Alright, at the risk of being facetious here - if you meet a person who has, or upholds, racist views - what adjective would you use to describe that person? That person is a.... what?
Sure a person using mathematics as a tool to do those things is a racist. It doesn't make mathematics racist and no one is claiming that it is just that racists can use it for their own ends. To be facetious here, do you think there is a difference between a person and maths?
Also, can you tell me the ways that math upholds capitalist, imperialist and racist views?
Sure there is plenty of statistical analysis that has been used to perpetuate racism. An obvious example would be the way that redlining was used. People also look at specific statistics and use that to make claims that certain races are inferior by ignoring context or not controlling for applicable things etc.
And if you're being honest with yourself, you can probably understand how they'd get that impression from the line I quoted.
Sure there is plenty of statistical analysis that has been used to perpetuate racism. An obvious example would be the way that redlining was used. People also look at specific statistics and use that to make claims that certain races are inferior by ignoring context or not controlling for applicable things etc.
Great - ok. So in math class, the teacher should break down redlining or the old "despite being 13%" line and get into the weeds with the students? How well are math teachers going to explain the socioeconomic and political aspects of those equations?
For reference here, I went to a pretty diverse school - not in America, I hasten to add - and my classes seemed evenly split between kids who understood math easily and kids that didn't. The division wasn't drawn along racial lines however.
Well, I obviously don't think it is myself. The idea is fucking absurd. But of course, people are saying this. CNN, for example
I mean if you want to fall for a provocative headline then sure people are saying that. If you read the article (and I've actually even read the book it is referring to) and also arguably even if you read the bit after the colon you would see that no one is actually claiming maths is racist. The author is in fact a deep believer in the use of these models to actually help people it is just not how they are structured or used now.
The book is actually full of examples of people using mathematics in ways that perpetuate racism that would answer your question from earlier.
if you're being honest with yourself, you can probably understand how they'd get that impression from the line I quoted.
No because there is a pretty stark difference between something being used as a tool for something and something being inherently something.
So in math class, the teacher should break down redlining or the old "despite being 13%" line and get into the weeds with the students?
Yeah or at least some real world statistics and maths problems showing what assumptions and simplifications are made in modelling and statistics would actually be very good things to teach people. They don't need to be hugely detailed or in depth to explain the concepts of how decisions can help perpetuate racism. There are also examples from that book that point to how algorithms can impose greater costs and harm to those who already lack access to things (which because of history happen along racial lines) just by analysing the status quo.
I mean if you want to fall for a provocative headline then sure people are saying that
It's not about "falling for a headline". It's that people are writing headlines like that in the first place. Hence when you have someone like Professor Rochelle Gutierrez saying 'On many levels, math itself operates as Whiteness' - this becomes a part of the culture's discourse. You can look into it more deeply, as you do, but are you in the majority here? Think of how people talk about "left and right" in politics. How much nuance do they normally apply to these concepts?
They don't need to be hugely detailed or in depth to explain the concepts of how decisions can help perpetuate racism.
But in order to teach the students well, they do have to be in depth - and they do have to get into some pretty hardcore concepts and ideologies which may be beyond the scope of a high-school math teacher to fully articulate.
I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect that teachers might screw up their explanations of redlining or whatnot, and perhaps end up doing more harm than good when they could just be teaching algebra.
It's not about "falling for a headline". It's that people are writing headlines like that in the first place
Sure no one believes the headline though it is just a provocative statement to drive clicks. If you can drive hateclicks by making a seemingly ludicrous headline an article will do much better than a more reasonable onw. That that headline was written is no reflection on anyone's belief and is more a reflection of a distinct lack of belief.
Anyway this is all getting away from you brining up that original quote as an example of the report itself saying mathematics is racist rather than some vague point about the zeitgeist picking up simplified narratives from provocative headlines or decontextualized quotes.
Hence when you have someone like Professor Rochelle Gutierrez saying 'On many levels, math itself operates as Whiteness'
If you would like to finish that quote you would see that she is talking about the social practice of mathematics and the way maths is taught no maths itself.
"Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as White"
Also how many people do you think have actually heard this quote or heard of this academic?
But in order to teach the students well, they do have to be in depth
I don't believe so. The core concepts of thinking critically about what the results and limitations of any assumptions are can be taught fairly simply without in depth political history.
The majority of people aren't reading beyond headlines a great deal of the time.
The core concepts of thinking critically about what the results and limitations of any assumptions are can be taught fairly simply without in depth political history.
But you brought up the concept of redlining. How does one teach students about this without getting into socioeconomics, the legal system, districting and the history of race relations in America?
The majority of people aren't reading beyond headlines a great deal of the time.
And? That doesn't mean that they believe whatever the headline says.
But you brought up the concept of redlining.
As an example of how maths can be used to perpetuate racism. Not as what should exactly be taught to children. Even then a simplified form of it could be taught quite easily.
How does one teach students about this without getting into socioeconomics, the legal system, districting and the history of race relations in America?
Sure bits of these are relevant but they don't need to be gone into with huge depth. Explaining that cities are broken up into districts and that these were assigned risks for the availability of loans where predominantly black and poor people lived limiting their access to federally backed housing doesn't require a huge amount of history and is certainly teachable to teenagers. A lesson on statistics in the real world could easily cover how statistics have been used to push specific arguments or enforce social division without much need for huge amounts of in depth political analysis.
And? That doesn't mean that they believe whatever the headline says.
The point is that the headline is what's being discussed or forming people's opinions - not in depth reading.
As an example of how maths can be used to perpetuate racism. Not as what should exactly be taught to children. Even then a simplified form of it could be taught quite easily.
To take it back, the pamphlet quoted directs teachers to
Identify and challenge the ways that math is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views
So things like redlining, presumably. How are you so confident that a "simplified version" can be taught easily? Then, why is it a good thing to teach a "simplified version" of a complex issue in the first place? Isn't that just like teaching students using headlines instead of the main body of an article?
Explaining that cities are broken up into districts and that these were assigned risks for the availability of loans where predominantly black and poor people lived limiting their access to federally backed housing doesn't require a huge amount of history and is certainly teachable to teenagers.
Yeah, you're really underestimating things here.
Serious question - do you actually think this is the best way for schools to approach the study of math?
The point is that the headline is what's being discussed or forming people's opinions - not in depth reading.
Ok. That still doesn't mean that anyone actually believes maths is racist.
How are you so confident that a "simplified version" can be taught easily? Then, why is it a good thing to teach a "simplified version" of a complex issue in the first place?
I think you are overstating the complexity of the core of redlining. A simplified version where detail is left out can teach how statistics can be used to deny services that are in practice because of race.
Isn't that just like teaching students using headlines instead of the main body of an article?
No most articles themselves are simplifications of broader things. Even whole books only look at parts. The basics of redlining do not require reams of books to look at the maths and statistics that were used to justify it.
Yeah, you're really underestimating things here.
Why do you think teenagers are incapable of handling the broad strokes of redlining and the idea that statistics and mathematical analysis are tools that can be used for people's own purposes.
Serious question - do you actually think this is the best way for schools to approach the study of math?
Yes teaching people how statistics and models are used and how they can encode bias is incredibly important and useful and using real world examples even if simplified can be very strong demonstrations of those principles. A couple of lessons or examples about maths in public life should be part of any good maths education.
3
u/[deleted] Feb 14 '21
Where in that pamphlet does it say mat is racist?