Why? Feels like there's a premise inherent in this conclusion that acknowledging and appreciating other worldviews or conceptual approaches serves no useful end or is harmful somehow. Conversely, are you implying it's better to intentionally limit your perspective? Why?
-
-
If you had to learn Swahili, would it help if you learned about The Japanese alphabet? It’s not that learning the Japanese alphabet isn’t good, it’s that it has nothing to do with teaching fundamental concepts in a way that is understood and practically used by the majority.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Okay but why are we taking an intro Swahili class instead of a linguistics class?
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
My initial comment should have read “teaching the basics of *A* language to a class.” The prob is ideology being crowbarred into subjects. Japanese grammar to help understand linguistics? Fine. Japanese grammar b/c we need to cross ‘Asian content’ off the diversity list? Gross.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CanuckPlucky @borrfdad and
The initial illustration (pain) is simply to show that playing word games by re-defining the context does NOT show a multiplicity of valid answers or ways of understanding. But ppl pretend like it does, so that they can claim that one set of answers is ‘western’ or ‘colonial’.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Can you try to ground this in something specific? That's too vague to make sense of and it's chock full of question begging. I'm no complex number theorist, but as I understand it, w/ different definitions and axioms 2+2=5 can be literally true. /1
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @borrfdad @CanuckPlucky and
So, as I understand it, you would just be wrong. If you have a problem with applying that logic to a particular case, hit me with that particular case. /2
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
With different definitions and axioms, purple can be green. Elvis can be Madonna. Literally any symbol/number/letter can represent anything, if we define it thus. The reason this is coming up is b/c conventional definitions in the West are... ‘Western’, thus oppressive.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CanuckPlucky @borrfdad and
It goes like this. There is a push to bring ‘ethnic studies’ into math curriculum. Like this: https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math%20SDS%20ES%20Framework.pdf … This is because ‘conventional’ math is ‘western’. It tends, therefore, oppressive & racist. So goes the argument.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CanuckPlucky @borrfdad and
So, in order to justify this approach, other ‘ways of knowing’ need to be seen as equally important to learn. If we want to replace western (oppressive) math, then we should teach aboriginal methods, etc. Except we live in the West. Everyone uses base-10. It IS the convention.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
If you want to genuinely understand mathematics, it is incredibly important and useful to understand that base-ten numerals really are only a social convention and does not represent any kind of abstract universal truth
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @CanuckPlucky and
And this is something that is surprisingly difficult even for educated people to understand, when they've never been exposed to the concept I mean look at what you just typed -- "base-10", not "base-ten" "Base-10" doesn't exist, it's meaningless Think about it
2 replies 2 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @CanuckPlucky and
ALL the bases are "base-10" "10" is how you write the number "two" in base-two, it's how you write the number "ten" in base-ten, it's how you write the number "five-hundred-sixty-seven" in base-five-hundred-sixty-seven
2 replies 4 retweets 22 likes - Show 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.