The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The conundrum to be solved, if the science is right, is how to implement a system that protects people from themselves without at the same time give them precisely that depressing feeling of lack of control.
Education seems like the only reasonable way to do it. Starting to learn statistics and psychology as early as pre-school maybe?
But:
Bell curve, Poisson distribution, probability density, all calculus.
Every time you replace an intractible situation involving very large (but finite) numbers with a continuous model you are doing calculus. The Fates are kind.
A better answer is volume 1 of Feller's "Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications", which uses entirely elementary techniques.
Epistemologically, all statistics is finite, and infinites and continuity only appear in the limit (via a process of closure useful because completeness simplifies many proofs, but not essential as sophisticated but straighforward proofs by closure can be turned into involved proofs using elementary techniques). Also, stochastic processes are equivalent iff all their finite-dimensional distributions are equivalent, so even there things can be a lot smaller than they are made to be by professional mathematicians.
My actual point is that the fixation with Calculus as the gateway to higher mathematics is misplaced. There is nothing more useless that what Americans call "AP Calculus" or "Freshman Calculus", especially for people in the humanities and social sciences (who, often, take a single term of Calculus as their only exposure to 'higher math'). I would much rather teach people "finite mathematics". Bush is a symptom, not the disease.
Radically Elementary Probability Theory
Which I must finish reading. When I find it again ...
Yes, but you don't have to teach calculus on its own first, you can just do it, in context. Bush is a symptom, not the disease.
Some elementary stats might be useful ('the increase in cancer risk is a shocking 100% greater! - from p = 0.0000001 to p = 0.0000002...') but perhaps best left as an optional extra for those who want the advanced course.
Which part of math is that? The point of the subthread was that, if you're going to teach people "advanced math", it should be prob/stat.
Although making "How to lie with statistics" compulsory reading in secondary school wouldn't be all that bad an idea. Bush is a symptom, not the disease.
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 2 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 5 22 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 1 comment
by Oui - May 13 65 comments
by Carrie - Apr 30 7 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 272 comments
by Oui - May 2712 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 231 comment
by Oui - May 1365 comments
by Oui - May 910 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 522 comments
by Oui - May 449 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - May 29 comments
by gmoke - May 1
by Oui - Apr 30257 comments
by Carrie - Apr 307 comments
by Oui - Apr 2644 comments
by Oui - Apr 879 comments
by Oui - Mar 19143 comments