Scientific American reported on a split in the math community. I haven't written about it yet. The American Mathematical Society and the Mathematical Association of America broke away from each other due to the fact that they were becoming too woke.
The article starts off okay, but it quickly becomes a hit piece on the new AMR for being racist and sexist. This is in line with the total lack of objectivity of Scientific American, which has diverted much of its mission to teach science so that it can further social justice, though in a misguided and ineffective way. The bias ofSci is in this piece. Am.'s commentary and slant is reflected in the fact that there are more pro- and anti-AMR quotations than there are pro- and anti-AMR ones.
I think this article is slanted, not me, because I tend to be opposed to the new directionSci Am is taking. You can read it by clicking on the picture.
This bit is pretty accurate, as far as I know, though you can see a bit of pro-woke bias.
The Association for Mathematical Research has sparked fierce debates in the math research and education communities since it was launched last October. The American Mathematical Society (AMS) and the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) both proclaim that they support mathematical research and scholarship. The latter two have started projects to address racial, gender and other inequalities in the field. Critics see the silence on social justice issues by the AMR as part of a backlash against inclusivity efforts. Some of the new group's leaders have spoken out against certain endeavors in the past. There is a growing division between researchers who want to keep scientific and mathematical interests separate from social issues that they see as irrelevant to research and those who want to keep pure mathematics out of the equation.
The author goes full steam ahead after throwing off the objectivity. All quotes are in italics.
The AMR is critiqued.
With bias, harassment and exclusion widely acknowledged to exist within the mathematics community, many find it dubious that a professional organization could take no stance on inequity while purporting to serve the needs of mathematicians from all background. A mathematician at the University of Toronto says it is hard to be a mathematician. Less than 1% of doctorates were awarded to Black mathematicians, and less than 30% to women.
>
.Louigi Addario-Berry, a mathematician at the University of Montreal, wrote about the AMR on his website. He told Scientific American that he is speaking up because he believes that the organization will hurt a lot of members of the mathematical community. It is being founded by people who have publicly stated views that are harmful to the creation of an inclusive and welcoming mathematical community.
>
Hass said in a statement to Scientific American that the focus of the AMR is on supporting mathematical research and that it benefits all members of the mathematics community. Addario-Berry wonders if the AMR can be neutral on social justice issues when some of its leaders have taken strong public stances on some of these topics.
This is very strange. The University of Chicago cannot be neutral on social-justice issues when many of its faculty have taken strong stands. Can the author not think of an organization being neutral even if its members have strong views? This is not rocket science. The University of Chicago is just that.
There is a discussion about the differences between the views of UC Davis math professor and the secretary of the new AMR. It seems like an attempt to tarnish the AMR by picking out members who opposed wokeness. It doesn't say anything about the organization's stance. Thompson is listed as one of the current vice presidents of the American Mathematical Society. This has nothing to do with the issue at hand and everything to do with trying to cast aspersions on Thompson. Wait! There is more!
Robion "Rob" Kirby is a mathematician at the University of California, Berkeley, and is a founding member of the AMR. He wrote that people who say that women can't do math as well as men are often called sexist.
As far as I know, men and women in secondary school perform equally well in math and reading, but the women excel in reading. Women like to read more than they like to do math. It isn't skill that is responsible for inequity between men and women.
Conservatives will leave an organization disproportionately if it becomes too woke, for wokeness is the purview of the Left, not the Right. If you are a liberal like me who doesn't like performative wokeness, you're going to have to live with being associated with some politically inconvenient bedfellows. The statement above doesn't represent someone who supports the new AMR, it's an attempt to insult it.
Then there is this.
The AMS and MAA have acknowledged the need for a more inclusive mathematical community. The AMS task force released a report last year detailing the historical role of the AMS in racial discrimination and suggesting actions for the AMS to take to correct the situation. The mathematics community must work to become anti-racist and hold ourselves and our academic institutions accountable for the continued oppression of Black students, staff, and faculty according to a 2020 MAA committee statement. We are failing Black mathematicians at every turn as a society and as a mathematics community. We kneel together.
>
The AMR has not made any statements about injustice.
That is pretty sarcastic, but is followed by something even snarkier.
In the year 2021, I'm supposed to believe that this omission is not an act of racism, according to the person who spoke to Scientific American late last year. I, as a 40-year-old black American mathematician, parent, and person who has paid a bit of attention to American history and American present, is supposed to believe that the actual obstacles that real mathematicians face in doing mathematical research and scholarship is not something that AMR ignores.
Kendian mishigass is that if your organization doesn't make an explicitly anti-racist statement, then it's racist. Hass denies that the AMR's silence on diversity is a message.
. The Global Math Department, an organization of math educators, wrote a letter to the editor in the November 16, 2021, newsletter stating that the creation of the AMR was not just a coincidence. The organization seems to be for those people who are trying to get some kind of purity within mathematics, away from the pure considerations of race, gender, class, ability, sexual orientation, and socio-economic status.
At the end of the article, there is a final shot.
Some of the founding members have left the organization. To create an organization to do something positive requires the trust and goodwill of the community that it wants to affect. Daniel Krashen, a mathematician at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in a November 14, 2021, thread that the AMR does not have something like this. I don't want to negatively impact the mathematical community by my actions and words. I apologize for making some people feel less safe and heard. I have decided to stop being a member.
Less safe? How has Krashen made anyone less safe? This whole article is a megaphone for the critics of the AMR. Nobody has been silenced and the only harm has been to people's feelings. I oppose the social conditions that prevent women and minorities from entering the math "pipeline".
The defense of the AMR.
The group is definitely focused on being inclusive, according to the current president of the group. He says that the AMR welcomes everyone to support mathematical research and scholarship. We will open membership to anyone in the world in early 2022. We will make it easier to participate from all over the world by removing financial barriers. Mathematical research is a global endeavor that is not restricted to a single nation.
>
. Hass denies that the founding of the AMR had anything to do with the antiracism push at the MAA. The AMS and MAA are wonderful organizations that we hope to work with, along with other organizations.
Hass is being disingenuous for he thinks that the AMR is a reaction to the wokeness of the other two organizations. I don't see that as a sign of racism, I see it as a sign of trying to keep an objective discipline from being diverted into political endeavors.
Four mathematicians criticized the AMR for racism/sexism or "harm", and one defended its mission. Scientific American has structured the article in a way that provides a critical sub-head for the title and ends with a critical slam.
I am not a fan of the views of all of the members of the organization. But with this article. Am. is always casting its lot in with the woke. They say there is no rationale for a mathematics organization that is not devoted to achieving Social Justice.
My extreme dislike for the direction thatSci might make this view conditioned. Am taking. Let me know if the piece seems to be for you.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
