Reading Differently

 One of the first moments that made me stop and think, more than simply nodding enthusiastically along, was when Dr. Su described his experience at Harvard during his PhD. I myself have an unusual mathematical background. I didn't take nearly as many mathematics courses as most of the people in our current program, and I occasionally feel out of the loop when more advanced subjects are discussed. I also have a close personal friend who is doing a Masters in Mathematics at SFU right now and has had similar experiences. Moreover, this friend of mine is a woman, which has lead to an extraordinary (or perhaps depressingly ordinary) amount of encounters much like when Dr. Su was told "You don't have what it takes to be a successful mathematician." I have a great love for mathematics, but I frequently struggle against the dominating perceptions of the discipline and the people who act as gatekeepers against the mathematical flourishing of all individuals.

Another stopping point for me was when Dr. Su pivoted from the ways in which mathematics underlies our technology to how we can teach for affection and curiosity. This was interesting to me because it felt like a contradiction. I am curious about math and passionate about math, but very little of that passion and curiosity is related to its utility. I am perhaps an anomaly in this, but I feel much more inspired by the beauty intrinsic to mathematics than to its usefulness in any domain of production. I agree that we need to teach math in humanistic ways, imbue the subject with life, but I feel as though doing so to meet the end goal of understanding and developing technology cheapens my sense of wonderment. Perhaps that is a selfish view. I recognize the very significant goods that can be done with mathematics, both in the development of technology and in the optimization of individual activities, but I often feel as though we have put the cart before the horse in mathematics. Algorithms, data, and game theory are all used in exploitative ways, reinforcing the current status quo of late stage capitalism. I see them as tools for liberation from that reality, and thus promoting their usefulness in those contexts is upsetting to me.

Continuing on through the chapter, I realize that these examples are quickly set aside in favour of an argument towards developing virtues and promoting human flourishing, but I still wonder why Dr. Su chose to introduce them at the beginning. It almost seemed like a concession to an imagined audience who would be skeptical of his main thesis.

With regards to the quote from Simone Weil, I found it to be very true. Some of my most profound and meaningful relationships have come about because other people have read me in ways that I am usually not seen. There is a surface level reading that suggests we have not been reading the discipline of mathematics carefully enough, and another reading which speaks directly to the story of Christopher Jackson and how he might be read or judged. I also think that this description should be extended in the other direction, as well. I recall a paper from about a decade ago where elementary students were asked to "Draw a Scientist" and overwhelmingly came up with images of a white, middle-aged, bespectacled man in a lab coat, usually standing at a blackboard or holding an Erlenmeyer flask. I also recall an encounter from my practicum in which I gave students a word problem about two people of unspecified gender hiking down a mountain. A number of the students solutions changed the context to a single person and used male pronouns. Even in teenagers, the stereotypes and prejudices about mathematics as a discipline and who can participate are well ingrained.