• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Decolonising Maths education

hinduwoman

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2001
Messages
165
Location
India
Basic Beliefs
Materialism
The article started promisingly enough saying there is no such thing as Vedic maths as a separate branch of maths; the author then goes on to say that in West maths was connected to metaphysics -- ok.

He starts to lose m from here:

Today, Maths is 100 per cent metaphysics. Imperfect Maths

The belief that Maths is perfect is certainly not universal. Indian tradition accepted Maths as non-eternal and imperfect. Most practical applications of Maths today, such as sending a spacecraft to Mars, are done using computers which do Maths “imperfectly.”
Teaching Western metaphysics spreads other biases. All systems of Indian philosophy, without any exception, accept the pratyaksa, or empirically manifest, as the first means of proof. This also applies to ganita. Science and engineering too prefer empirical proofs to metaphysics. So if Maths is done for its practical applications, it is better to accept empirical proofs in the subject. But present-day Maths teaches such proofs, hence all Indian philosophy, is “inferior.”

Does any of this make a difference to 2+2=4? Yes. Why is 2+2=4? Putting together two pairs of apples to show four apples is erroneous on formalism which disallows reference to the empirical. Formalism posits that 2+2=4 can be “rigorously” deduced only metaphysically from, say, Peano’s axioms. Most people don’t know how to do that or even what Peano’s axioms are. Thus, most Western educated never even properly learn 2+2=4. Since they are taught alongside that all other systems are inferior, they are compelled to rely blindly on Western authority for everything. This is by design. To put an end to this mental enslavement through indoctrination, education must be decolonised. The new government ought to focus on that.

What does it mean? :thinking:

The West should decolonize itself by getting rid of 'zero'. !
 
Since they are taught alongside that all other systems are inferior, they are compelled to rely blindly on Western authority for everything
Huh.
i was kinda taught that brute force math was the way to go, to be really, really sure.
That's why i tend to plug easy numbers into my spreadsheets, to be sure i've used the formula correctly.
I mean, if i get 2+2=1420.002, I know that i've done something wrong.
Or, back in the 70s, i knew that the batteries on my Texas Instrument calculator were getting weak...

And since Watergate, the West hasn't really depended on the authority of authority figures.
 
What does it mean? :thinking:
Dunno but it looks to me like he needed to write a article and couldn't think of anything worth while to write about so drug up the old faithful oppression of the subcontinent by those nasty Westerners. The math and metaphysics seems to be just grasping for something to rant about.
 
I suspect it's a prank, one of those articles submitted to demonstrate that post-modern magazines don't actually peer review, or even read, what they publish.
 
Sounds like a piece of anti western thought. Westerners don't 'get it'...Asian philosophies do.

Over here the only people that professionally study Peano and the foundations of math are theoretical mathematicians. The rest of us are applied mathematicians,we rely on the theoretical mathematicians..

Over here mixing math with cultural metaphysics would be considered counter to the idea of objective mathematical logic and reasoning. The ancient Greeks mixed philosophy with math.
 
It taking the old question of the basis of mathematics, and linking it to western imperialism.

Maths is not based on empiricism (measurement), it's based on rationalism (logic) 2+2=4 is true because that's part of what the definitions of 2 and 4 are. It doesn't depend on taking two apples, adding another two apples, and then carefully counting the result. The formal proof of 2+2 =4 (or more typically, that 1+2=3) is a very very long and complicated piece of working, that's useful to go through only because of what it reveals about the axioms on which such arithmetic is based, not because the result is supposed to be surprising in some way.

The author is simply complaining that Maths is based on this western (ancient Greek) idea of formal logic, rather than on the Indian idea of maths based on empiricism. Or as he puts it, Western maths is idealised and perfect, where as Vedic is based on measurement and thus at base imperfect. I'm not particularly familiar with Indian history, but I'm not confident that the author has all his ideas straight. For a start, I'm fairly certain that Indian mathematics was a major contributor to the idea of zero and from there, to negative integer mathematics (e.g. 2-4=-2), which don't naturally flow from empiricism at all. And any mathematical system, Vedic or Western, has to treat a numerical solution to a real-world problem as an approximate model.
 
Yes, the whole idea of Indian maths being something separate from Western maths is ridiculous.
Zero was thought up by ancient Indians which is simply not anything emperical.
 
Non-colonial maths?:
A cow produces enough dung daily to cook 1.5 kilos of rice. Chickpeas take three times as long to cook as rice.
How many cows would it take to cook four kilos of chickpeas?
 
Back
Top Bottom