Finally, the language and *taste* calcifies. Now there's an idea of what math is "good" or "cool." These aren't testable or objective. They can't be. These are organic social constructs. 6/
-
Show this thread
-
In short, when wise people say "math is a social construct," they don't mean the *veracity* of math. They're talking about the *importance*. Here is where Conway falters (for his colleagues) and delights (for everyone else): Conway did any mathematics he thought interesting. 7/
2 replies 5 retweets 42 likesShow this thread -
By doing this, he is showing irreverance for the social norms other mathematicians have created as "important." As all of us know, when you act as if you don't care about what others seem "cool," you become "uncool." And that's exactly what happened with (some) mathematicians. 8/
1 reply 2 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
They know he has technical chops and is an excellent problem solver *and* theory builder. But he's doing those things with games, pictures, weird number sequences. He's not doing those things with cohomology, sheaves, derived functors. 9/
2 replies 3 retweets 31 likesShow this thread -
They aren't necessarily even jealous; they're just confused. "Why isn't someone who is *able* to do these things doing them? Why is he wasting time?" 10/
1 reply 1 retweet 23 likesShow this thread -
Sometimes they will (again, with completely good intentions) tell Conway and/or people like him "you know, with your talents you can probably do some pretty important work." (I myself have gotten these comments, while doing "unimportant" work like consulting or blockchain) 11/
1 reply 1 retweet 21 likesShow this thread -
So when Conway does his (amazing) work, he's really doing it as a "people's mathematician." He's doing what *he* sees as fun and important, which makes it a more "vulgar" form of mathematics. For professional mathematicians trained on "classy" mathematics, their taste buds.. 12/
2 replies 2 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
have also been trained (from their socially-constructed groups) to see "vulgar" math as less important, much in the way that a 90's classical TV critic may judge South Park or the Simpsons as "mainstream trash," or, as something deeply close to my heart, people saying that 13/
1 reply 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread -
.. "videogames cannot be art." When they play videogames, their brain is *trained* to tell them that this is *supposed* to be bad, because "respectable" people are not playings games but are reading books, or so they think. We mathematicians are no different. RIP. 14/14
6 replies 1 retweet 31 likesShow this thread -
Addendum #1: Nuance is hard. I mean "(elite) mathematicians don't recognize Conway's work as real." I don't mean that the mathematical community doesn't recognize him; he is obviously (to everyone, mathematicians or not) a genius and popular.
5 replies 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread
Hm. I think that Conway was not a mathematician. He was a computer scientist, a coder, a mostly autonomous intellectual explorer. He was brilliant, but he served a different aesthetic, just as economists or physicists do.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
That's a super interesting take; not sure if I agree yet, but "explorer" definitely resonates. I think all mathematicians fancy themselves explorers, but end up becoming landlords after they explore a slightly new place.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @krzhang
It strikes me how different disciplines were founded not just to answer different questions, but to ask and answer them in very specific ways, upstream from defining methods. And being an autonomous intellect is universally frowned upon, unless you start a new discipline.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.