/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15912515
Yes

>>15912515
2+2 is actually 10

numberline goes 0 - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
jump twice from 0 and get to 2
jump again and get to 4

>>15912515
It's a partial truth like language is arbitrary. We can name everything differently but we need to be consistent about it to build any sort of understanding.

>prove this from first principles
>wait you're not allowed to use first principles

>>15912515
this debate is so 2020

let me give an unironic response. formal math, formulated in terms of ZFC set theory, plus peano’s axioms, do provide a formal foundation for math (to the satisfaction of most, but not all philosophers and logicians) and deriving the rules of arithmetic from them actually turns out to be quite cumbersome. however Russel and Whitehead did it—a massive book , hundreds of pages, and they only made it to division.

however among scientists, we take a more pragmatic approach. in elementary school you learn addition by appeals to lived experience like “you have two apples in your lunchbox. teacher places two more apples on your desk. How many apples do you have?” this is not formal but appeals to lived experience of everyone (besides schizos and fatasses) because objective reality exists and imposes itself on the experience of all but the most mentally ill or mentally in denial

so, in that latter perspective, it is kind of a social construct because it uses an appeal to experience. however that social construct arises very naturally, even without any acculturation, because objective reality manifests it so obviously. not even the most larping tranny is going to get a fifth apple’s worth of calories nutrients out of two in the lunchbox and two from teacher. in fact if they were to structure their caloric and nutritional needs on alternative arithmetic, they’d soon get malnutrition and die. thus the evolutionary mechanism establishes this appreciation for objective reality in the biological and genetic makeup of well-adapted beings

>>15912515
>2+2 doesn't equal 4 because.. uh... language itself is just an arbitrary social agreement
Niggers who think they're smart are very obnoxious.

I hate dumb _

Wait till they hit you with 'per capita'.

>>15912598

>>15912601

>>15912598
>>15912601
>>>/pol/

>>15912605

>>15912609
Per capita is a social construct.

>>15912614
>I found some idiot on Twitter and posted it on FlourChin!
>I don’t know how to use MSPaint so it was actually 5 repetitive spam posts
>But trust me on FlourChud they love when I do this! spam is like their preferred meat like in Hawaii!

kill yourself

>>15912614
You are mentally ill and will be forever scorned by society

>>15912565
Simple as this. Also, I hate blacks.

>>15912515
Yes.

The values assigned to each the symbols is entirely cultural.

>>15912578
Refute it.

>>15912619
People who speak unfashionable truths are often scorned by society..

>>15912627
the concepts referred to by words and symbols are cross cultural, however. saying that “two” is a social construct because “dos” is the word in spanish is a false argument because in spanish they still have the same concept despite different symbology

>>15912515
Society itself is the social construct but not the realistic concepts that come from it and the educational understanding of those concepts that are symptomatic of socialized desires but still true.

>>15912515
this is stupid because the "challenge" is also a social contract. You can't *ask another person* to perform an action without any social influence, because your *asking* is a social influence. It's like saying "It's impossible to not think of pink elephants" and using the fact you think of pink elephants as proof of that statement.

>>15912515
>nigger philosophy levels
hitler was right

>>15912628
"Refute" is a social construct, therefore it can mean anything I want it to mean. My refutation is therefore that you're a nigger and you have no basis for saying my refutation is incorrect.

>>15912628
It's not up to you to decide wich movements always preserve the truth you retard nigger faggot. They are there just like the rocks on the field and the sun on the sky. I ain't going gödel mode just because one morning you woke up and decided to pull a gorilion genders out of your open ass.

>>15912598
Ironically this guy doesn't understand per capita either despite having a phd in statistics

>>15912762
I'm not seeing where in that image anyone claims to have a Ph.D. but I was never good at those image hunt games so maybe I missed it.

2 is a social construct
+ is a social construct
= is a social construct
4 is a social construct

All language is a social construct, these terms exist as a way to describe real world phenomena and communicate them to others in a meaningful way as a product of social interaction.

The only argument he might make is one where you change the meaning of one or all of the symbols but in that case they would lose their meaning while whatever new representation society adopts would be the new describer of the real world phenomena.

It's meaninglessness.
Why does anyone find it relevant to post here?

>>15912764
I'm talking about the guy in the op. He had a twitter thread where he demonstrated lack of per capita understanding with racial crime statistics.

>>15912515
>social construct
nigga, fucking crows can count and even know what zero is, screw off with your commie cult crap, you freirean cock-gobbler

>>15912515
what does he mean by "first principles"?

>>15912515
I'm very happy that I'm not on twitter

>>15912766
Why would language being a social construction mean that you could not prove something using language or math since the concept of "proof" would then also be a social construction (I guess)? What's even the point of claiming that language is a social construction to begin with if even that sentence itself would then be a social construction? You're not adding anything new to the table.

If you have two apples, and you go to the store and buy two apples, the fact that it is called "F-O-U-R" in english language is indeed a social construction. But the fact of reality that you have FOUR apples is not a social construction because four apples is the same number of fruit in all cultures and societies. How dumb can you be?

>>15912614
I found your pictures hilarious, anon. Don't care about the triggered predditors.

>>15912515
Axiom are part of a social contract and proofs are natural phenomenon. Like the difference in chess between rules and winning moves.

>these definitions of basic math symbols have served humanity well for millennia and have played a fundamental role in literally every scientific achievement
>let's throw it all out the window to advance post-modern tranny lunacy and own James Lindsay on twitter

>>15912614
The world would be a less funny place without niggers

>>15912575
she's blackish...

>>15912515
No, it's a social contract.

>>15912628
All language is arbitrary. This is not a new, profound, or interesting statement. Mathematicians, more so that anyone, are familiar with this fact. That's why they freely use and define symbols however they want in different contexts.

That's not a property of mathematics and it doesn't in any way demonstrate that mathematics is arbitrary or culturally relative. All it demonstrates is that mathematical symbolism is arbitrary and culturally relative. Abstract mathematical truths and the symbolism we use to represent these truths are two different things. Identifying mathematics with mathematical symbolism is a form of equivocation.

Symbolism and the objects represented by symbols are two different things. The image you are looking at is not a pipe.

>>15912515
If you start with apple apple and you get apple apple, you're going to end up with apple apple apple apple. This is not a social anything; this is an unavoidable fact.

We can bicker over what we call apple apple or apple apple apple apple or how to symbolize the operation of putting apples together, but whatever you call it there's no getting away from four.

>>15912515
White women who burned coal and are now raising a mutt and 61% of single mothers.

>>15912515
The sad thing is this kind of retard quipping about social constructs will be seen as intellectually impressive twenty years from now. Right now that idiot is seen as a dumbass by most, but eventually the mean will go so low that he will be seen as a genius for his retardation.

>>15912515
if it is, it's the best possible one regarding how much 2+2 is.

>>15912526
so if I take two rocks and place them next to two other rocks that's just imaginary?

>>15912628
just cause we use an arbitrary name to refer to something does not mean that thing doesn't exist in reality.

two is just an agreed upon name but two rocks placed together is two rocks placed together refuting it because the name for 'two' could be anything we wanted it to be is just autistic.

>>15915630
There are many tribal cultures in South America and Africa that do not consider 'two' rocks placed together to mean 'two', but instead 'many' and would say there is no difference between 'two' and 'three'. The assumption of math being universal or a mark of civilization is a colonialist western conceit.

>>15915642
did small African tribes invent the computer your using to communicate with me right now?

>>15915671
Why does that matter? What matters is that our discussion on computation takes into consideration all voices.

>>15915673
no it dosen't the universe is objective and the language which is closest to that objectivity even if it's an abstraction is automatically better in every regard.

>>15913010
ummm they were taught that construct by researchers?
having a sense of quantity doesn't make mathematical operations or our number system "innate"

>>15915675
>the universe is objective
citation needed

>>15915681
Number Systems don't have to be innately ingrained from birth to show they have a real affect on the world. (As your using a COMPUTER to communicate with someone far away.) is that enough reason there is validity to numbers being real.

>>15915684
retard

>>15915684
But since I'm feeling nice I'll explain to you

Regardless of your race or religion, regardless if your blind or deaf, or you speak another language

Fire will burn you
A bullet to the head will kill you
Nutrients will sustain you

Even if you don't conceptualize theses things or view them differently the result under the same conditions will always remain the same as in they are Objective.

that is objectivity and since the universe is comprised of these rules and things,

the universe is objective, that is your citation.

>>15915618
The mathematical language used to represent that is a social construct, therefore the statement "2+2=4" is a social construct

>>15915836
then any spoken, word, ideology or other form of communication and what not are also social constructs, including the idea of a 'social construct'.

>>15915675
The idea of objective truth is nothing more than academic imperialism. There are many paths to truth, and not all of them reach the same truth.

>>15915681
>taught that construct by researchers
nope
https://www.livescience.com/crows-understand-concept-of-zero.html

>>15915642
god niggers are dumb holy fuck

It is a consequence of Peano arithmetics etc

>>15915942
So you're telling me if I set myself on fire it won't burn me unless I believe it's true.

>>15915942
this IV used to mean 4.
I +I+I+I should equal IIII
instead someone invent IV, which is IIIII now called V. on ward and onward
math is a language, and languages are social constructs
in the future someone can create new terms to more efficiently measure or intuitively teach math

>>15915963
Fun fact: Before ebil white colonists showed up in the 19th century sub-saharan africans counted by scratching tally marks in hyena bones and hadn't fully mastered multiplication and division yet.

>>15915912
Correct

>>15916214
which means trans people are a social construct.

>>15912558
No it's ||||

>>15916476
Also correct. Now you're getting it!
Because I and my people have social power and you don't, I can enforce my will on the society and you can't. I say that Trans Women Are Women, and that's true because I can convince the state and its tools of violence to force you to accept that. It's true because I can lobby the schools, and my people are teachers. We can control how your child values.
(You) bend the knee. I AM THE TRUTH.

>>15915979
Languages aren't social constructs. If you think 2 apples plus 2 apples gives you an infinite amount of apples, then you don't know what reality is. You can literally see the apple.

>>15916487
Extremely low IQ take.

>>15912515
> Harvard

They sure can pick'em.

>>15916485
Actually gravity defines the truth. If gravity stops, then you don't exist.

>>15916492
the universe of discourse determines what values are instantiated in a particular universe. Since I do not have the lowest IQ, I will make the lowest IQ the new average of IQ and thus I actually have the greatest IQ.

>>15912515
Is math at the highest levels just a bunch of philosophical masturbation?

>>15916522
at the highest levels, math is supposed to explain the truth of reality. for example, if I saw an infinite amount of apples constantly then you could use math to fix my brainwaves so I don't see an infinite amount of apples instead of 4. Anyways, languages have to represent reality to some degree otherwise they communicate no meaning.

>>15916537
>if I saw an infinite amount of apples constantly then you could use math to fix my brainwaves so I don't see an infinite amount of apples instead of 4
What does this even mean? I will never understand schizos.

>>15916522
It depends. But usually it is a solution in search of a problem, yeah.

>>15913027
Logic or God or something, I don't know. Clearly not the mathematical axioms, since he rejected someone doing that. I also imagine he doesn't want to entertain that 2 means this many and 4 means this many, and that this many plus this many is this many.

>>15912515
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJxBkE9d-TA

>>15916538
Basically you see reality the way it is

>>15916622
when did I reject mathematical axioms?

>>15912515
You have 2 apples and then you get two more apples. You end up with 4 apples. Simple math translates pretty immediately to the physical real world.

>>15915642
it doesnt mean 2=3, just that 2 and 3 are a part of the same set of "many". I doibt they wouldnt care if one of the tribe wad consistently given 3 instead of 2 gifts as an experiment. Just because they dont phrase it the same way doesnt mean they dont see the difference or that there is none

>>15916732
Shit, even English has that same quality with words like "couple," "few," and "several." Tell someone to grab a couple of apples, and they could reasonably grab up to three of four before being accused of taking more than "a couple" of them. I assume for their sake your average subsapient tribe would have more than one word for a plural amount of something.

>>15912515
2+2=4 depending on what the binary operator "+" stands for.

>>15915673
It is not necessary to take into consideration the opinions of retards

>>15915769
That has nothing to do with objectivity. That's just empiricism, a constant conjunction of sensation we're designed to give meaning to

>>15915687
That doesn't make numbers *real* it's just a way of interpreting the processes. You can't use man-made inventions as proof of a concept being real. It's nothing more than one of many models with strengths and limitations

>>15916929
22 if it is a fusion sign

>>15912515

>>15916983
>man-made inventions
wilful retard >>15915958

>>15917036
>crows can be trained to have some conception of the magnitude of quantity so that means math is real
??? Wow 1 apple is closer to no apples than 4 apples is. I guess that means math structures are real?

>>15912577
It's an argument from empiricism, and at the end of the day empirical observation forms the basis of most first principles. You can often use other models and axioms to validate those first principles, but it's typically the empirical result that is more foundational. Take Newton's Laws of Motion for example: You can go through all sorts of algebra and invoke all sorts of conservation laws to validate those results... but at the end of the day it's those conservation laws that are based in the empirical observations (objects in motion stay in motion, acceleration is proportional to force and inversely proportional to mass, actions and reactions come in pairs) that are the more foundational things at play.

Similarly, you can bend over backwards using convoluted axioms and set theory to validate that observation that 1 + 1 = 2, but at the end of the day, it's 2 because that's what it fucking is - that's the universe we live in - and all the other mathematics is just built off of shit that originates from that first empirical fact.

>>15917200
you're conflating empirical observations with logical, self-consistent reasoning

>>15917227
The axioms of logical reasoning are based in empirical observation.

>>15917010
She is not a Math professor. She is a professor in mathematics education.
Stupid people exist. What a surprise.
/pol/ Anon is also one of them. What a surprise.

>>15912577
very good post
do you mind explaining why is it so hard to prove something so simple like addition that you need a whole book for it?

>>15917286
They're based on the fact that experience isn't necessarily reliable so the opposite is actually the case

>>15917338
>Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics Education in the Faculty of Education of the University of Haifa.
>Published in the Journal of Urban Mathematics Education
Well, no need to check 'Early Life'.

>>15917116
>didn't read the article
typical

>>15917527
they are true even if no-one is experiencing them, they are utterly reliable

>>15912515
In the sense we assume base 10 when not specified for example

>>15912618
funny how you took issue with this and not the retarded OP

>>15912558
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r_FISLAf6c&t=14s

>>15917338
>xie's not a real math professor so it doesn't count, no one serious actually entertains this nonsense!
https://twitter.com/wtgowers/status/1290219079605694464

>>15916732
No, they see it as literally the same. Those smelly low IQ NIGGERS believe 2=3 because number is a social construct.
I'm a high IQ anticolonialist antiracist btw. Those FUCKING NIGGERS should be glad to have such a compassionate person as me on their side. Fuck white supremacy am I right fellow leftoids? :^)

>>15917010
This is why women should not pursue college education.

>>15912515
I wouldn’t call prank axiomes a social contract since you don’t have to implicitly agree to a contract to use them. Anyone can understand the underlying logic, no matter their cultural background

>>15912515
Yes, all math is fake and you can just make up whatever you want. Listen to the rest of these retards. Good luck in life. You need it.

>>15918558
>prank axiomes
but are they funny?

>sum or set
>axis/dimension
>material (newtonian?)
What is a unit?

>>15915642
this nigga saw Vaush's "aqua" moment and legitimately thought it was a good debate strategy

>>15912515
The symbol that represents a number is a social construct, but the amount defined by those numbers would still be the same no matter what, as such 2 (regardless of the symbol used) plus 2 will equal 4. This whole line of reasoning gets rather useless rather quickly, it'd be like saying every word racist or something because language is a social construct

>>15916969
doesn't change the fact the universe works the same for everyone regardless of how you view it.

>>15916983
so what is the computer computing Nothing?

Depends on if you're referring to the framework used to describe the relationship referenced by 2+2=4 or the relationship itself.

Also, arguably, a logically equivalent framework would exist absent society, and just the standardization of the particular framework is the social construct.

Basic arithmetic fucking exists outside humanity.

>>15912705
Luld at this

>>15917010
>democracy devolves into autocracy
>because cultural retards keep jamming nonsense into institutions that should be focused on accepting common universal truths at face value, to try and muddy the waters into trying to imply arbitrariness to something that doesn't have any
>all to try and flip the social equation of who holds power when discussing empirical outcomes

I hate the idea of dictatorships, but by golly, it makes sense that this occurs when that occurs.

>>15912766
"is" is a social construct

The “social” component of math is secondary. Math is primarily a construct of the mind since it is built upon the fundamental parts of cognition such as recognizing quantities. This only appears as “social” once many people (who have minds) communicate this same ability to each other. Ultimately, this discourse can just collapse into impotent rumination on Agrippa’s Trillema, in which case the social construct theory is just as baseless as any other hypothetical theory.

>>15918753
>What is a unit?
some would say that it's the lil' nigga that when thing*it=thing, where *=multiplication

>>15918785
>Vaush's "aqua" moment
the what now?, what does the group that sung barbie girl have to do with the horse cock enthusiast?, im lost

>>15920102
Reminder that Clinton was technically correct, the best kind of correct.

>Lewinsky files affidavit in Paula Jones lawsuit claiming they never had sex
>during Clinton's deposition in lawsuit Clinton's lawyer paraphrases this as "there is absolutely no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton"
>during impeachment Starr's lackey tries to nail him for what his lawyer said
>Clinton correctly points out that "is" is present tense so what his lawyer said was technically correct
>also according to the official legal definition of "sexual relations" used during the lawsuit getting a blowjob wasn't technically sexual relations but giving one was (though according to the Starr report he also ate her ass and that technically counts)

>>15920559
>>15920102
I was born in 91 and remember recording over my dads copy of all this on VHS with episodes of pokemon. He was very upset.

>>15912526
Fpbp

>>15915642
>There are many tribal cultures in South America and Africa that do not consider 'two' rocks placed together to mean 'two', but instead 'many' and would say there is no difference between 'two' and 'three'. The assumption of math being universal or a mark of civilization is a colonialist western conceit.
which is why they're worthless genetic dead ends. What's your point?

>>15912598
>>15912601
>>15912605
>>15912611
>>15912614
What the fuck is this?
>Hehe, appears single mothers are predominantly likely to be Black per capita
>Gotcha BIPOC Twitter user!
Why the fuck are /pol/cels so obsessed with statistics like this. What is the point of this racebaiting? And race does not exist btw.
All this proves is that the Black community continues to struggle, from the devastating impacts of slavery, Jim Crow and drug pushing of the 80s among other things and proves the argument that the Black community needs assistance in the form of affirmative action, welfare, reparations and government initiatives. As long as chuds continue to lack self-awareness they will continue to just play themselves. Thank you we agree. The Black community does need help.

>>15912515
Yes. Math is a language and arithmetic is its vocabulary. Questioning why 2+2=4 is like asking why a house is defined as a permanent shelter. 2+2=4 is a definition, just like the meaning of words is. Unlike with spoken languages, numbers denominate a non-ambiguous fact of reality, no matter whether you write 2+2=4, II + II = IV or 01 + 01 = 001.

>>15916522
Math at the highest level is supposed to be solving open problems
It usually goes like:
>read paper about solving problem
>while solving problem author discovered new problems they couldn't solve or only partially solved original problem
>solve problem listed, publish a paper on it
And if you're well-known in the field maybe you even come up with new problems and people agree they're important

This shit is like meta-mathematics or something
Its only taken seriously by people who's parents or gubermants paid their way through their PHD

>>15920577
top kek

>>15912515
I hate to spoil the shocking conclusion to this guy's innocent Socratic line of questioning BUT I'm pretty sure the takeaway is that we're going to need to airdrop the entirety of the Congo on Vermont because all possible objections are just social constructs. how did I do

>>15912515
My dick in your mouth is a social construct

They always bitch about social constructs but they just want to tear everything down and replace it with something amiable to them.
By "they" here I mean retards

Why don't we ask for proofs at this stage?
Frankly, the number of newly defined symbols is so large, that proof comes naturally. We don't need a proof that
1 + 2 < 127364
or
6 + 6 = 12
because of the training and practice and correction the teacher provides
at this point, students do not separate an axiomatic proof system from their perception of correct math facts
OP is posting a pedagogically incorrect concept, namely that students should be exposed to concepts that are too advanced for them.
It is not correct to do this; it is wrong and could confuse a student.
The student's understanding at this point is a matter of procedural and declarative knowledge, practice, and training as well as use of math learning aids. The axiomatic proof concept has not yet been introduced and will not be introduced until the first geometry course.

When students show their work for this problem and get their work graded by the teacher, they do NOT have to provide a proof.
I repeat: they do NOT have to provide a proof to get full marks.
WHY NOT?
Because set theory and the axiomatic proof method are not correct ways of teaching at this level.

If you want a relatively simple axiomatic proof, you can try proving the intersection theorem from the ZFC axioms
>For all X, if X is nonempty, then there exists a set Y such that z <- Y iff z <- w for all w <- X
it's very difficult to use the Fitch derivation inference rules for first order classical logic and the ZFC axioms to prove this seemingly trivial theorem, but it can be done, and it looks a bit like computer code
the Fitch derivation rules can be found in Language, Proof, Logic by Barwise and Etchemendy

Obviously not. I can observe it myself easily by having two objects. Mathematics are a reality of the universe, not a social construct.

>>15912515
Me talking about 2 plus 2 equaling 4 and conveying this fact to you is a social construct but the fact as a reality unto itself is not a social construct but independent of it for all animals and inanimate unintelligent objects that have yet to articulate it in speech or computerized speech.

>>15912515
It's not a "social construct". Numbers are defined by what works. Axioms are objectively true.

In some ways theorems arent defined by axioms, axioms are defined by theorems. The ancient Greeks realized that 1 +1 = 2 is an objectively true statement and we made modern mathematical axioms to allow 1 + 1 =2 to be true.

>>15921124
lets think about this for a minute

kill niggers

behead niggers

roundhouse kick a nigger into the concrete

slam dunk a nigger baby into the trashcan

crucify filthy blacks

defecate in a niggers food

>>15920559
>ate her ass and that technically counts)
what the hell does this mean? I see zoomers getting propagandised with it but it sounds like some gay strategy to give people chronic worm infestations

>>15921124
kek, (you) made me reply

>>15912558
In base 4

>>15912515
>>15912575
Reminds me of philososhitters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQpQgYICIAc

>>15923080
"ass eating" has been a meme since slightly before the Romans started making memes. People did not actually do it until this decade, and even now it is usually ironic. The intended use of the act is in a metaphor: Their armies eat ass, that politician eats ass, you should buy my shit instead because they eat ass. It is similar to how these days everyone believes the romans were all gay because they drank lead and spent all day calling politicians they didn't like their version of the word faggot. Metaphors lost to time, modern retards taking everything literally as they are incapable of both generalization, hypotheticals, conditionals...

>>15912515
Sure, but so is niggers not being animals

>>15923566
How have you been on the internet long enough to find 4chan but are still this naive?

>>15916961
This simple sentence refutes thousands of DEI departments.

>>15912628
If i have a stick, it is 1 stick. If i put it with another stick (1), then there are 2 sticks

>>15920392
Something to the effect of "If I refer to the molecular composition of H20 as Aqua and you refer to it as Water, we are not talking about the same concept." This was in service of debating some or another excessive homosexual on the internet.

>inb4 he was just talking into a mirror

>>15915642
>math being universal or a mark of civilization
Correct, as evidenced by your examples of uncivilized mud people who can't count to 3.

>>15912515
Nope. Quantities actually exist, but they're ontologically dependent on substances. It's inconsistent to be a scientific realist and to deny the reality of quantities at the same time.

>>15912515
'2+2=4' is self-evident.

>>15925308
jesus christ... you know, i don't like it, but i must admit that all this recent-ish(20+ years) loonery is fairly amusing, if just in the creativity to be shit-stains upon humanity

>>15920828
>>15925367
Sorry, but you lost this debate in 1945.

>>15925453
Daily reminder that until colonialists showed up in the 19th century most of africa hadn't invented wheels yet.

>>15912515
No, but the symbolic representation of it is.

>>15925462
You lost the debate already. Stop embarrassing yourself.

>>15912515
Yes. In my experience, it's aways fools and low IQs with a grudge because they did bad in math class who interpret this as "u can't know nuffin, nothing exists, maths doesnt real". They always act like its some epic "gotcha!" moment, but it really isn't all that profound. Modern mathematicians long ago side-stepped the philosophical difficulties with mathematics being a "social construct" (why are retards so fixated on this term?). We don't make claims that any mathematical object or system is "real" or "true reality". No one with a basic understanding of philosophy of maths claims the resulting models are a one-to-one representation of the "real" world. We use the ones that seem to give us good predictive results, or we explore them out of sheer intellectual curiosity.

It's as vapid as someone saying
>wow you use a map to plan your trip? You navigate using a map? Well guess what, thats just a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!!!!

They seem to expect everyone to abandon reason and stop doing math because le social construct boogeyman. Like buildings and bridges will suddenly collapse and electronics will stop working because 2+2 = 4 is "made up"

Instead of being resentful maybe they should calm down and accept their inferiority.

>>15925783
>I called you a nazi therefore I win
sorry that's not how this works <3

>>15925799
ayo we been flyin an shiiet before that WHACK ASS CRACKA newton finna bring a nigga down an invent gravity an shiet
shiiiiet

>>15925864
>posting pictures from after whites looted the country
Not the most compelling argument.

>>15925925
Looted what? The spears and loincloths?

>>15925925
Wealth is mainly labour, retard.
The land of milk and honey is 100% genetic.
Subhumans can only create hellholes, due to their inferior genetics.

>>15925925
How do you think whites got skyscrapers? They looted them from Wakanda and took them back to their shitty backwards countries.

>>15925992
shit I meant to respond to this >>15925934 racis AF witeboi

>>15925799
>why are retards so fixated on this term?
Because if they can argue it's a social construct, it is more easy for them to change and redefine it to better suit their agenda.

>>15925864
I'd bet 100 trillion zimbabwean dollars that all that sheet metal and plywood was manufactured by whites or chinks too.

>>15917338
>she is not a Math professor
>she's just a professor that teaches teachers how to teach math to children
that's even worse desu. It's bad enough that Zoomers can't add fractions. Now Gen Alpha will grow up thinking that 2+2=5

>>15912515
I wonder how much social contracting there is if I pick two marbles, put it on a cup, then put two more marbles to it, and suddenly there's not 4 marbles because this gentleman on OP's picture stole them

>>15927072
>everything good in the world is white supremacy
What exactly is their real goal with all this?
That whites are a god race?

>>15912515
1+1 = sqrt(2)
if by "1" you mean the standard deviation of a noise signal. so it depends on what sort of system "1" is anchored to. It usually refers to "1 object" but it could be a measure of anything, and as my example shows that can lead to different results for 1+1

>>15927091
By reframing all the positive qualities of something as akshually bad it leaves your enemy no way to defend themselves.

>>15927102
1+2=9999999999999999
if by "1" you mean muh dick, by "2" you mean two fine boobies, and by "9999999999999999" you mean 9999999999999999 sperm splashing on the back of my toilet.

>>15927105
you're not wrong

>>15912515
>Is '2+2=4' a social construct?

On a technical level it is. Primarily because the symbology of numerals are an abstraction utilized for measurement, which can be applied to any object you choose.

On a physical level taking two pairs of a given object and totaling it to get "four" only works in relation to scale. Objects are naturally composites of many sub-structures and at the smallest scales the ability to distinguish individual units is not feasible depending on the theory of quantum mechanics you support.

I suspect however that the post in question is not interested in the debate about the value of measurement itself in accordance to the limits of distinguishability. But primarily in the debate of linguistical application of the collective consciousness of mind.

To the average person on the street who is only concerned with the practicalities of everyday life '2+2=4' is not a social construct. To a theorist or philosopher who is concerned with the theory of mind, mathematical scaling or quantum mechanics '2+2=4' is a social construct.

>>15912515
>Have 2 apples
>add 2 more apples
>count total number of apples
>have 4 apples now
>therefore 2+2=4
Anyone who thinks it's more complicated than that is retarded.

>>15927072
i hate paulo freire

>>15927102
>if by "1" you mean the standard deviation of a noise signal.
mh, i smell a circle somewhere for that result to appear, am i near the reason?

>>15927771
>Have a noise signal with standard deviation of 2
>Add another noise signal with standard deviation of 2
>Count standard deviation of summed noise
>Have standard deviation of sqrt(8) now
>Therefore 2+2 = sqrt(8)
It's about how you define the symbols

>>15927156
>I suspect
you'd be wrong, read paulo freire's works

>>15927904
>Have a noise signal with variance of 4
>Add another noise signal with variance of 4
>Count variance of summed noise
>Have variance of 8 now
>Therefore 4+4 = 8

>>15927156
woah you're smart let's be friends

>>15912515
formalism is a braindamage

>>15912515
No and half the thread arguing otherwise are the same niggers trying to brainwash the board into marxism