Only if kids were taught this sort of mathematics during school time. Maths would have been my favourite subject. It is the polar opposite right now. The maths I study at school is a torture for me because even my teacher would refuse to explain it.
@@yuddhveersingh710 haha agreed. My current teacher is better than the one I had last year, but she goes on the syllabus thingy too. I'm gonna assume that she's saving us the trouble of studying too much cause we have so many other subjects to worry about (since the condition is kinda worse for subjects like Physics and Geography)
@@froytroi_clou actually our education system is not good but we can change it for our next generation so keep grinding ☺️ be happy nice to talk to you
I have have my own audio recordings of this brilliant talk. Eugenia Cheng is one of my favorite people. Great to see someone went through the troubled to gift the rest of us with her presence.
I love this. I find a home in abstract algebra because growing up, I enjoyed analogies, more than anything. You can bet that learning about inductive logic, and abstract math is quite a boost to me
Was just searching on some starters with abstract algebra...and was kind of received Groups, Rings etc. from every video. But this one caught my attention. And that cube really gave some kind of inspiration to start with. Being dramatic is her style...and that is what that caught my attention. Thanks!
She is a passionate advocate for what was called the canon of "classical education"! The “Trivium“ aka. the pure/theoretical or formal sciences: - logic - rhetoric - grammar and the perhaps more practical sciences of the "Quadrivium" : - Arithmetic - Geometry - Music - Astronomy The Trivium teach you to think and give you the the Tools of Thought, it's clear Formulation and it's Expression The Quadrivium are exemplary and teach you how to apply these tools. Missing in this canon are - and in Professor Shengs argumentation are tools and exemplars for assessing and determining the value or relevance of the object of Consideration: - Economics and Utility - Morals and ethics with respect to its own and any higher Objectives: - Philosophy - Theology Thank you, Professor Sheng, you are reststating the exact reasons why I studied pure Mathematics, theoretical Cybernetics and Philosophy at "Universities" and not at "Polytechnical Schools". Thank you for being so passionate about true Education towards what may be called "wisdom" versus the pure dissemination of knowledge.
I do not believe, having looked at your publications, that you are a pure mathematician at all. Do you understand what pure mathematics is? It isn't emotion: "In a world where fake news stories change election outcomes, has rationality become futile? In The Art of Logic in an Illogical World, Eugenia Cheng throws a lifeline to readers drowning in the illogic of contemporary life. Cheng is a mathematician, so she knows how to make an airtight argument. But even for her, logic sometimes falls prey to emotion, which is why she still fears flying and eats more cookies than she should. If a mathematician can’t be logical, what are we to do? In this book, Cheng reveals the inner workings and limitations of logic, and explains why alogic-for example, emotion-is vital to how we think and communicate. Cheng shows us how to use logic and alogic together to navigate a world awash in bigotry, mansplaining, and manipulative memes. Insightful, useful, and funny, this essential book is for anyone who wants to think more clearly."
Simple fact is, If you don’t understand the true nature of the underpinnings which make Cheng’s argument so beautifully simple and strong. Then certainly, you’re not a mathematician yourself. Thus, there’s an entire class of universal truths for which you must not have access to. Therefore, it follows that you don’t have the tools required to create a compelling counter argument against her claims. QED
a,b and c are known as "variables". They can have any values what so ever, they don't even need to be numbers. "a" can be 5, cat, 60 degree rotation, a 4 meter long line or pi. It all depends on what you choose a to be.
The thing is: Math is math and it keeps beeing math. Math is in itself true and will always be true. Even if we still have to discover more of it there is always this inherent truth. But Society, Society changes over time. Therefore this whole diagram could be utterly useless or maybe completely false in a couple of decades because of the "white" and "male" component. The only thing that alwas will give you privilege is "rich" but everything else is changing and therefore not always true. (Even beeing rich could give you bad privilege, for example in a bloody revolution against rich people) I think it is not good to make the connection to math with cultural issues because that may make people think that those issues are allways true and will always be true.
Part of working with other people is disproving, it's part of what you call "abstraction". This isn't some sort of Pythagorean cult where you are prosecuted for disproving.
Wow I have seen it all now they are really taking it to an extreme by using Concepts in math to explain social situations in Dynamics unreal get a life
How so? She set out to explain what is meant by multiple intersecting groups being more privileged and she did. She wasn't trying to prove the existence of privilege or explain what privilege might entail. You might disagree with how she skewed the parallelepiped, or with privilege existing, but in terms of getting what people mean by multiple types of privilege coexisting so we all talking about the same thing, this was relatively straight forward. And yeah, individual events in the real world are vastly more complicated, but the only way humans have ever managed to get a grasp of anything is by abstraction and limiting the information to what is relevant.
I think this was awful. I can understand why you are at the School of the Art Institute. Where is your PhD? I am genuinely now questioning whether they should have given you one at all.
"Abstract mathematics is highly relevant in our daily lives." Brilliant.
Only if kids were taught this sort of mathematics during school time. Maths would have been my favourite subject. It is the polar opposite right now. The maths I study at school is a torture for me because even my teacher would refuse to explain it.
So i got you you're from india😂 it can only happen in India
@@yuddhveersingh710 I doubt that. I think this is something that happens in other countries too
@@froytroi_clou maybe but you know indian teacher's don't explain properly they just want to cover the syllabus
@@yuddhveersingh710 haha agreed. My current teacher is better than the one I had last year, but she goes on the syllabus thingy too. I'm gonna assume that she's saving us the trouble of studying too much cause we have so many other subjects to worry about (since the condition is kinda worse for subjects like Physics and Geography)
@@froytroi_clou actually our education system is not good but we can change it for our next generation so keep grinding ☺️ be happy nice to talk to you
One of the most beautiful demonstrations of finite abelian groups, isomorphisms, and factor groups that I’ve seen.
Generalisation is the beauty of mathematics ♥️
I have have my own audio recordings of this brilliant talk. Eugenia Cheng is one of my favorite people. Great to see someone went through the troubled to gift the rest of us with her presence.
I love this. I find a home in abstract algebra because growing up, I enjoyed analogies, more than anything. You can bet that learning about inductive logic, and abstract math is quite a boost to me
Why is this so poetic and dramatic like I am watching a staged Shakespearean plays
Was just searching on some starters with abstract algebra...and was kind of received Groups, Rings etc. from every video. But this one caught my attention. And that cube really gave some kind of inspiration to start with. Being dramatic is her style...and that is what that caught my attention. Thanks!
Love your work, now math actually seems pretty cool.
Clear, practical and inspiring
Thank you for share!
Since when did INFP's head into pure mathematics?
LOL
Not me being an INFP and getting inspired by her to go back to grad school lmfao
Looks like they deleted all the dislikes and comments criticizing this talk. Censorship at its finest.
Not really. Why would they leave your comment up if that were the case?
She is a passionate advocate for what was called the canon of "classical education"!
The “Trivium“ aka. the pure/theoretical or formal sciences:
- logic
- rhetoric
- grammar
and the perhaps more practical sciences of the "Quadrivium" :
- Arithmetic
- Geometry
- Music
- Astronomy
The Trivium teach you to think and give you the the Tools of Thought, it's clear Formulation and it's Expression
The Quadrivium are exemplary and teach you how to apply these tools.
Missing in this canon are - and in Professor Shengs argumentation are tools and exemplars for assessing and determining the value or relevance of the object of Consideration:
- Economics and Utility
- Morals and ethics
with respect to its own and any higher Objectives:
- Philosophy
- Theology
Thank you, Professor Sheng, you are reststating the exact reasons why I studied pure Mathematics, theoretical Cybernetics and Philosophy at "Universities" and not at "Polytechnical Schools".
Thank you for being so passionate about true Education towards what may be called "wisdom" versus the pure dissemination of knowledge.
Excellently delivered!
Great talk. She’s pretty Shakespearean as a presenter
I was at the bottom of that cube often. 😂😂😂 Love this explanation.
What a boring lesson of politics rather than a could-be interesting lecture on maths
My God, it didn't even reach to the level of Politics.
Thanks I feel like a positive vibe
My takeaway is that all maths is applied
This is going to change history
I do not believe, having looked at your publications, that you are a pure mathematician at all. Do you understand what pure mathematics is? It isn't emotion: "In a world where fake news stories change election outcomes, has rationality become futile? In The Art of Logic in an Illogical World, Eugenia Cheng throws a lifeline to readers drowning in the illogic of contemporary life. Cheng is a mathematician, so she knows how to make an airtight argument. But even for her, logic sometimes falls prey to emotion, which is why she still fears flying and eats more cookies than she should. If a mathematician can’t be logical, what are we to do? In this book, Cheng reveals the inner workings and limitations of logic, and explains why alogic-for example, emotion-is vital to how we think and communicate. Cheng shows us how to use logic and alogic together to navigate a world awash in bigotry, mansplaining, and manipulative memes. Insightful, useful, and funny, this essential book is for anyone who wants to think more clearly."
Simple fact is,
If you don’t understand the true nature of the underpinnings which make Cheng’s argument so beautifully simple and strong. Then certainly, you’re not a mathematician yourself.
Thus, there’s an entire class of universal truths for which you must not have access to.
Therefore, it follows that you don’t have the tools required to create a compelling counter argument against her claims.
QED
@@manuninjaboyIf you understand it, please explain it simply, so us troglodytes can comprehend.
I noticed she was shouting when she said "...and shouting!".
Where is the discussion on mathematics?
❤❤❤❤❤❤
Great, and lovely.
It's really very powerful beyond the general thinking
brilliant, Eugenia.
Amazing, thank you Eugenia
Beautiful
👏👏👏👏👏👏
I got lost at the 4.30 mark. After that I was unable to follow.
a,b and c are known as "variables". They can have any values what so ever, they don't even need to be numbers. "a" can be 5, cat, 60 degree rotation, a 4 meter long line or pi. It all depends on what you choose a to be.
Each letter at the bottom of the cube builds up to what each corresponding multiples of the previous cube represent.
@@youkaihenge5892 I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean.
Love her :)
The thing is: Math is math and it keeps beeing math.
Math is in itself true and will always be true. Even if we still have to discover more of it there is always this inherent truth.
But Society, Society changes over time. Therefore this whole diagram could be utterly useless or maybe completely false in a couple of decades because of the "white" and "male" component. The only thing that alwas will give you privilege is "rich" but everything else is changing and therefore not always true. (Even beeing rich could give you bad privilege, for example in a bloody revolution against rich people)
I think it is not good to make the connection to math with cultural issues because that may make people think that those issues are allways true and will always be true.
@Tracchofyre you didn't get the point
@Tracchofyre ur mom lol
👍
Did this insight come out of observing the shape of the diagram, or using your own sense. More examples would have really clarified the issue.
This example comes out of her book: The Art of Logic, which has many similar and different examples. Absolutely fascinating read; well worth a look.
Part of working with other people is disproving, it's part of what you call "abstraction". This isn't some sort of Pythagorean cult where you are prosecuted for disproving.
I disapprove .... 😁😁😁
Her public speaking style is too annoyingly aggressive and loud to be inspiring.
I haven't understood the reasoning.
Wow I have seen it all now they are really taking it to an extreme by using Concepts in math to explain social situations in Dynamics unreal get a life
What a waste of math ability.
The irony in these comments. Funny.
literally magical thinking. nonsense.
How so? She set out to explain what is meant by multiple intersecting groups being more privileged and she did. She wasn't trying to prove the existence of privilege or explain what privilege might entail. You might disagree with how she skewed the parallelepiped, or with privilege existing, but in terms of getting what people mean by multiple types of privilege coexisting so we all talking about the same thing, this was relatively straight forward. And yeah, individual events in the real world are vastly more complicated, but the only way humans have ever managed to get a grasp of anything is by abstraction and limiting the information to what is relevant.
This is what I call intelectual stupidity ...
me = male
You could go into politics.. The political mathematician.
She is scaring me
Beauty defined.
I think this was awful. I can understand why you are at the School of the Art Institute. Where is your PhD? I am genuinely now questioning whether they should have given you one at all.