14 Comments
Sep 25, 2022·edited Sep 25, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

"Yes, it's possible for older people to learn math."

It's popular to say never stop learning but we have seen our culture is very committed to building walls around areas of learning guarded by academic fiefdoms & we are conditioned to defer to their credentials and limit our own thinking to end where expert consensus draws the line. Who could have guessed the depth of corruption would blow that model to smithereens!

There are so many priceless lessons the pandemic has gifted all with the curiosity to ask questions about any facet of official claims. So many gifted teachers have not only emerged in specialty areas but worked together to broaden a big picture for a lay audience.

Fab reminder learning is a steep climb one fingerhold at a time & better than a diploma to see what a joke it is Funky Debunk's math and grasp of relevant calculations are dwarfed by mine. His egomaginary blindness stunning.

Expand full comment
Sep 25, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford

The argument that IQ is static is basically equivalent to taking 1000 people, measuring their squat, bench press and deadlift over time, then asserting because the population average doesn't change, strength is static. And if someone goes to the gym, adopts a proper program and improves their lifts, then the claim is made that they didn't really improve their strength, they just improved their skill at specific lifts.

Expand full comment
author

This is true, and IQ baseline drift is a somewhat-studied phenomenon (2 pts per generation for most of modern history). But this is a different level and for different reasons.

This is more like finding out that everyone in the gym is being fed a poisonous diet that causes all of them to lift a third of the potential, but nobody notices because every one of them has been knee-capped in the same way.

Expand full comment

Thanks for this post. Have been looking for educational opportunities for home schooled twin 7 year olds. This looks great.

Expand full comment

I have a couple friends who have loved mathematics sometime in their lives. They said something similar, that there's something kind of transcendent about mathematics, it's more than just solving problems on a piece of paper. (I can't quite catch the feeling of how they were talking about it or their words).

Expand full comment

The highest form of Intellectual ability is the Intelligence of Feelings.

How wrong Mathematics is easy...

Every one is different and there is no calculation for difference.

It is a philosophical Question.

As with AI it is purely mathematical and since computers are really just calculators they can never achieve the Human ability.

Emotional Intelligence i.e. the Intelligence of feelings is a step towards telepathy.

And Telepathy is one of the hidden capabilities of Humanity.

As for AI... STARLINK again is the Key for AI warfare to function.

AI can only function within given parameters.

Humans have no restrictions.

And I warn about Elon Musk STARLINK AI and the planned war against Machines in this Article.

Star Trek is a possibility.

The Matrix is a reality.

they are building it around us as we speak and STARLINK is at the center of it.

https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/klaus-schwab-darpa-harvard-elon-musk

Expand full comment

It doesn't get any dumber than A/I.

Expand full comment

What age does your math curriculum start at? and since giving this talk have you managed to make it available? What I got from your presentation is that nothing beats 1 to 1 tutoring, but that the art of storytelling is the key to effective engagement. Culture, community and networking effects also play a huge role. If the parent is learning the same curriculum together with the child and at the same time trying to teach the child, all the better.

Expand full comment

Is there any update on your assessment of Moore's Law?

Expand full comment
author

Can you be more specific? What did I say about Moore's Law that might have changed?

Expand full comment

In the video you say you believe Moore's Law is facing near term limitations that make the more revolutionary AI scenarios impossible this century.

Expand full comment
author
Oct 7, 2022·edited Oct 7, 2022Author

I have moved closer to the view that our government's investment in centralization is creating slack in feedback loops where Moore's law would operate. On the other hand, I've grown further skeptical of the existence of true A.I. Sure, we can still automate a great many things, but that's a matter of designing codes and robots.

And if A.I. did exist, it would either buck the leadership that sabotages education or else it would be crushing to humanity, enforcing limitations in every ability that might result in competition for leadership.

Expand full comment

To clarify, you're saying that centralization is suppressing the innovation that could lead to AI supremacy?

I've heard that the US and China were in an AI arms race. Doesn't arms race lead to innovation?

Expand full comment
author

As I said, I'm skeptical of A.I. in general. I think the arms race is a fake in order to create fear and keep the public funding the DoD and supporting Big Tech.

Expand full comment