I wrote in a previous blog post how the far-leftist "social justice" ideology appears to, at some level, have this very strange concept (I assume even without them consciously realizing it) that the riches in free western countries just somehow exist on their own, independently of people or what they do, like all these riches just somehow magically sprouted from the ground, like a cornucopia or fountain of wealth, and that what people do doesn't have anything to do with it. Thus, likewise, they seem to have this strange attitude that it doesn't really matter if people work for a living or not, that working only affects their personal life and well-being, not that of anybody else. A bit like a "job" is merely a way to get a slightly larger share of that wealth that's emanating from the ground, and thus someone losing that job would have no effect on anything other than that person himself and his personal life. Nobody else would be affected.
Likewise they therefore appear to have this strange attitude (again, probably even without consciously realizing it) that it doesn't actually matter how competent you are at your job. The job exists merely for you to get a slightly larger share of the riches, not to actually achieve something for those riches to exist in the first place. As long as you just occasionally show up at work and seem to maybe do something, you are awarded with a share of the riches. It doesn't really matter how good you are at your job, or what your experience and talent is at it.
Thus, from the far-leftist perspective it becomes more important who gets this opportunity at the larger share of the riches, than what their qualifications for that job are. "Marginalized" "minorities" should get these jobs because they somehow "deserve" a larger share of the riches. Whether they are actually competent at the job doesn't seem to matter at all.
Of course this kind of mentality (conscious or subconscious) often leads to the most ridiculous ideas.
For some time now the new fad among far-leftist ideologues and self-appointed "experts" is that mathematics, the rigorous rules of it and the requirements put onto students, is "racist" and "white supremacy". A particularly notorious recent incident related to this is education officials in the state of Oregon declaring that it's "white supremacy" to focus on finding the right answer in math class.
For starters, it shouldn't even have to be stated, mathematics and its rigorous nature has exactly zero to do with any kind of racial issues. Mathematics is absolutely universal, unambiguous and the most objective field of science that exists. It's the hardest of all sciences by a long, long shot. ("Hardest" not in the sense of difficulty, but in the sense of objectivity, rigor and strength of proof which is not subjective nor up to interpretation. This in contrast to the "soft" sciences. It's the only field of science that can achieve absolute proof on hypotheses, unlike any other fields, no matter how objective they may be. It's the only science that can have hard-proven irrefutable facts.)
Mathematics is also completely universal in that its study and development has existed and builds upon the work of countless people from countless cultures. For example, a significant portion of current known mathematics was developed by Arabic people in the Middle-East regions (incidentally before Islam came along and killed pretty much all scientific endeavors in those regions, but that's not here nor there.) Likewise very important mathematical contributions have been developed in places like India and China over the centuries.
Needless to say, mathematics, and the rigor of mathematics, has absolutely nothing to do with culture, race, "whiteness", "white supremacy", or anything of the sort. It has existed since ancient times (mathematics developed over 2000 years ago is still as valid today as it was back then) and it's independent of culture.
Saying that "it's white supremacy to focus on finding the right answer" in math class is completely ridiculous. However, it goes to show what I wrote at the start of this post: The concept has entered even school officials that it doesn't really matter if students learn math. Even if they never learn math, or even if they come up with "their own math" that's absolutely and categorically incorrect and unusable, it still doesn't matter.
It all comes down to that very idea: Doing things the correct way doesn't matter. Knowledge and competence in a particular field doesn't matter. How well you are able to do your job doesn't really matter. If you feel like doing things in a completely different way than has been taught over centuries that's just fine. Your own personal subjective reality, your own subjective way of doing things, is just fine. No need to worry about having to do things "correctly".
They seem to be absolutely unable to comprehend that the riches in free western countries do not exist on their own, but are the product of the work of its people, doing the right thing to build society and technology. This cannot be built without the proper knowledge, expertise and competence. If a particular job requires correct math, then you need to know the correct math. Your own personal subjective "math" will not work. This is not up to opinion. This is not subjective. It's a hard fact. You need to know how to actually do it.
"a significant portion of current known mathematics was developed by Arabic people in the Middle-East regions"
ReplyDeleteThis was Indian mathematics that was translated. If you're referring to Al Khwarizmi, his books were:
Hisab Al-Hind (Calculations of India)
Jiz Al Sind Hind (Astronomical tables of Sind & Hind)
Kitab al hisab al Hindi: book of Hindu numericals=>"Algorithmi de Numero Indorum" ("Al-Khwarizmi's Indian numericals") leading to the word, Algorithm
The Bakhshali manuscript is the earliest known archaeological evidence of algebra, dating to the 3rd century.