/sci/ - Science & Math

>counting indians as real humans
only a woman would be so foolish.

> ...

I had no idea that math was unfeminine.

Realistic solution: "Can we make women less stupid?"

>>4136225

This.

What are you OP? A Mental Patient?

Women are physically inferior to men

Men are better at thinking crap (e.g. maths, science and inventing crap)

Women are better at remembering shit and rearing children.

>>4136225
>impossible solution
>realistic

pick one

Emphasise the role math plays in natural science. (girls like biology). Tach the history of the subject (girls like history and social subjects).

Done. Physics and math were always presented to me as something you needed to be good at if you wanted to be an electrician . the fact that introductory lessons on physics don't mention Aristotle represents a significant failing in our schools.

>In the Karbi tribe, women receive four years less schooling than men and may not own land.
>In the Khasi tribe, women are the landowners, men do not handle money

>Researchers found little difference in ability among men and women from the Khasi tribe. Among the Karbi, however, men were 36-per-cent faster at solving the puzzles than women

So when women are handicapped vs. men they perform worse than men, while when men are handicapped vs. women they perform as well as women.

How does this disprove innate differences?

>>4136388

>But in the Khasi tribe, women are the landowners, men do not handle money and both genders are educated equally.

Shhhh....looks like you missed a little part that could be important

>>women aren't worse than men at math.

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/36/14786.abstract
>about one-third of the effect can be explained by differences in education.

>>4136149
How is this news? It seems like something that was obvious since the 1950's.

>counting indians as real humans
only a woman would be so foolish.

just going to repeat this again, it wasnt just a mysoginistic racist statement, you cant compare handling money to the mathematical advances MOST of which were made by men, every important mathetmatical formulae and axiom is male invented, women add nothing because they have no real logic to rely on, and logic is key to maths that isnt just monkey see monkey do.

Give a brother and sister a calculator and you bet your ass they can both add 2 plus 2.

In my high school class, the girls were generally better than boys at math and science.

>>4136472
Then every male in your class needs to be killed so you dont spread your inferior genes.

Most women I know are going into biology or Liberal Arts

never a mathamagician or engineer

>>4136470
but the fact remains that there are many women in math and science. i am what people these days call a "misogynist" (when it comes to say, women in the army) but I've worked with tons of women and they were very good at what they did. it seems like you have a severe lack of experience with the real world, and you're probably stuck in your undergrad classes with a bunch of stupid girls who do science because "GEEK IS CHIC TEE HEE".

>>4136414
Everyone but /sci/ knows this. Mainly because /sci/ hasn't seen a girl in 6 months.
>>4136470
Males influenced the way we do math nowadays because women were baby machines for most of history.

New study in America shows that divorce rate is spiking because women are leaving the kitchen and not taking care of kids. Family values degrade and in 10 years will be non-existent in American culture.

Math is for ugly goofball people. Ugly women study science and hot women study liberal arts. Go look at these Stanford math students, bunch of freaks. I know one of them went to UCSD with me.

http://math.stanford.edu/photos/students/index.html

>>4136213
The politically correct way to address non-proportional demographics is by blaming everyone except the demographic. So let's just assume that all these female super genius would-be physicists decided to stay home and pop out babies because math wasn't feminine enough for them.

>>4136503
Holy fuck...they're hideous. Is it because they don't care about their appearance, or is it their appearance that drives them to loneliness and mathematics?

>>4136503
No, women in liberal arts are just better at putting on makeup, mainly because they're only good at putting on makeup.

>>4136655
>implying a well-realized intersection between both liberal arts and the sciences aren't necessary for a well-rounded person.
>implying Einstein didn't play the violin

It isn't either-or.

>>4136149
>selected tribes
>rural india
>strang and uncertain conclusions

Lets draw a conclusion in regards to all women and all men on this planet

Only in social scienes

>>4136666
What are you saying, quadsboy? That science students should be better at putting on makeup?

>>4136655

Yale student Victoria Marshman (Medieval History). Who is going to get further in life, Victoria or one of those ugly Stanford pigs? You must be an ugly Asian girl, perhaps you went to UCSD?

>>4136676
Pretty much

>>4136503
Megan and Evita would get it so hard.

>>4136503
Not enough Asian girls. Another reason Berkeley > Stanford.

>>4136677
She might have a nice body, but there's definitely something wrong with her face. Besides, that's a little unfair to compare amateur flash-in-the-face photos with ones made with nice camera and light and, probably, with help of professional make-up artist.

Mathematics and English literature double major here. I'm logical, and I get hipster pussy. Be jelly.

>>4136677
White/Male/Berkeley/CS, actually.

>>4136703

Physics and philosophy here. Same, and I outperform the aspie human calculators, too.

>>4136666
Einstein had the first rocker hairdo.

>>4136699

So with some lighting and makeup Elizabeth from Stanford will look like a model, LOL!

>>4136724
Philosophy is no less logical than mathematics.

Mathematics is essentially philosophy that has been proven.

Philosophy is good ideas that can't be proven.

Psychology is bad ideas that can't be disproved.

>>4136696

Gook bitches are nasty and have no ass/tits. All I remember from UCLA was infinite ugly fucking Asians.

>>4136748
Stupid stereotype. I've dated a skinny Chinese girl with a big ass and tits and a slightly chubby Japanese girl with huge tits. There are just as many white wiminz with no T&A, you just don't notice them because they're not worth noticing.

>>4136770

Here are some real live Gooks from UCSD. Take a look at the lookers in the front row. Gooks are nasty, hot ones do not exist in the real world.

>>4136789
So where's the hot whitey in that pic?

So does Stanford only accept ugly people to their math department? That ugly Curry-Nigger girl must smell like shit in person and must have infested her dorm building with bed bugs..

>implying math is unfeminine
Math is feminine, but maybe not as many women study math even though they're good at it, and that deviates statistics.

Art is considered feminine and males excel at that too.

>>4136736
>>4136736

>>4137006
Which part do you disagree with?

>>4137009
The part that you wrote.

>>4137011
Psychologist detected.

>>4137015
Gambling addict detected.

>A study has just discovered that all men have a dick

>Implying women can't be equal to men

>Implying having a dick is not the product of culture

>>4137009
>Philosophy is no less logical than mathematics.
You could say that for pretty much everything. Do you guess in Physics or Geology? Do you guess in womens studies? Is Art or History somehow illogical? There are hundreds of different philosophies and none of them are wrong in the end, however there is only one true math.

>Mathematics is essentially philosophy that has been proven.
x is applied y and so on

>Philosophy is good ideas that can't be proven.
>Psychology is bad ideas that can't be disproved.
What makes an idea good or bad? And you make it sounds like philosophy is right but unfortunately it can´t be proven and psychology is wrong but unfortunately we can´t disprove it.

>Reading a newsreport on a study
>Implying this was the actual precise conclusion of the paper and isn't blown way out of proportion by the media, who's just stirring up shit.
>Not reading/browsing through the actual paper to see what it says.

And still you faggots consistently mark everyone else as acting 'unscientifically'. Surely, if one takes the effort to find a large sample of men and women to do a semi-controlled experiment, you're not just going to let them solve a simple puzzle...?

In any case, male and female brains are PHYSICALLY DIFFERENT. It's retarded to say that both sexes are equal/identical to each other, because we're simply not. Having different interests and capabilities doesn't mean that either of them is worse or even useless (unless it's some hipster-guaranteed-unemployment shit like 'History of art')

>>4137118
brains are different. yep.
but how is that an argument for excluding/discouraging someone from entering the field of their choice?

isnt performance, not sex, the best judge of what is suitable for any given person?

>>4137346

>but how is that an argument for excluding/discouraging someone from entering the field of their choice?

Never wanted to imply otherwise. If people want to enter a field that perhaps doesn't best suit their capabilities, but they're very highly motivated and hard-working then of course they should be given the opportunity to do so. This holds for either gender.
Having the opportunity to enter a field doesn't automatically mean that any average performance differences should be ignored - especially not if these differences [possibly - I'm not a neuroscientist] stem from physical rather than mere social differences.

>>4137406
>Never wanted to imply otherwise.
so you agree.

>doesn't automatically mean that any average performance differences should be ignored
who ever suggested that statistical observations be ignored or suppressed?
its the people that want to expose girls to math that keep harping about the stats?

what exactly do you think is going on?

>>4137406
are you just put off by the "multi-cultural"ness of their language? get over it. results>feels.

do you prefer the sciences being the sausage fest they are presently?

>>4137083
If you realize that philosophy is based on logic and reason, then you must have never studied it, or you studied it and don't understand it. You may think you're philosophizing with me right now, but you're not deconstructing my ideas, you're deconstructing the language that I use. That's not philosophy, it's rhetoric.

For instance, you're assuming that my statement that philosophy is logical implies that other disciples are "illogical". To answer your question, however, some guesses are made in these fields and some logical fallacies are made. In physics, The Big Bang Theory, existence of Higgs bison particles, etc. are guesses, but there are philosophical reasoning behind them.

History makes attempts to explain how certain events shape the world, only considering what information is known, without considering how accurate the information is, whether recorded history is more important than unrecorded history, or whether historical events shape the world at all. It's not necessarily wrong, or necessarily illogical, but not necessarily logical either.

I never said philosophy is right, and it's mostly not. Given that most philosophers disagree with each other and present conflicting ideas, it would be logical to conclude that most philosophy is wrong. In fact, philosophers have been known to make claims that contradict what we know to be true in attempt to challenge what we perceive as truth, but they never do so without some irrefutable reason behind it. It's all based on reason.

Psychology is similar to philosophy but based on rhetoric rather than reason. Take psychosexual development for instance. The idea that someone is "anal retentive" because they had trouble toilet training is just something stupid people eat up because it seems clever to stupid people, and the fact that it was ever taken seriously shows how horrible most of psychology is.

>>4136149
Why is that a problem. My hair consists of a disporportionately great amount of blonde hairs. I don't see why I should try to attracts other haircolors to my head.

The problem would be if women wouldn't be allowed into math, women who were as capable or more so than the men in the same positions. If more men like doing math than women, who gives a flying fuck.

>>4137608
>The idea that someone is "anal retentive" because they had trouble toilet training is just something stupid people eat up because it seems clever to stupid people, and the fact that it was ever taken seriously shows how horrible most of psychology is.
Confirmed for superficial knowledge of Psychology.

>>4137608
>History makes attempts to explain how certain events shape the world, only considering what information is known, without considering how accurate the information is, whether recorded history is more important than unrecorded history, or whether historical events shape the world at all.

I beg to differ, history is all about being critical about your sources; and since the late 60's a lot more credit has been given to oral history. As for philosophy of history, that's not a part of history.

>>4137608
>Psychology is similar to philosophy but based on rhetoric rather than reason.
more like "but based on social norms"

recently psychology seemed to have moved from the "we can fix the broken" to "self-help for everyone".
wtf is up with that?

fags

>>4137608
>I never said philosophy is right, and it's mostly not.
Philosophy is not right or wrong., any more than math is right or wrong, or air, or cats, or guitars.

A philosopher uses logic and reasoning to arrive at certain conclusions. The use of logic and reasoning may be faulty, but that doesn't say anything about logic and reasoning themselves. All you can say is whether you find philosophy useful or not, whatever that would mean. You can't say philosophy is right or wrong, any more than you can say religion is right or wrong, because a concept in itself doesn't make any statements.

SMBC and XKCD really get on my nerves. Not in Tim Buckley is as shit as them.

All the comics come across as preachy, sanctamonious and pretentious. YEAAAH, WOMEN ARE GREAT AT MATH YOU SEXIST PIGS. YEAAAH, BLACK PEOPLE ARE HUMAN TOO.

>SMBC and XKCD really get on my nerves.
>SMBC
>OhShitNiggerWhatTheFuckAreYouDoing.jpg

"Researchers found little difference in ability among men and women from the Khasi tribe. Among the Karbi, however, men were 36-per-cent faster at solving the puzzles than women – a difference researchers attributed to the men’s greater education. "


lol gotta love psychology.

I am not dismissing this study completely but it needs to be repeated in a better controlled setting before the results can actually be claimed as valid

>>4137661
>he doesnt wann burn crosses with us?
>what a sanctimonious prick.

>>4137661
Prepare to rage.

https://plus.google.com/111588569124648292310/posts/G2Pjv7Zuwd6

>>4137672
Have you guys ever learned anything about anything, ever? A perfectly controlled environment is impossible. And I don't have a bloody clue how you would envisage a better controlled one. Another isolated tribe where the roles of men and women are even more equally distributed? There will always be cultural differences between the sexes whenever there is any form of culture.

>>4137672
i seen this one study that was cool.

two groups, mixed gender.

both groups take a math test. high school level.

one group fills in a bubble with their sex. one doesnt.

the women in the group that had to identify their sex on the test did worse that those that did not.
>reminded im a woman, i better do bad at this math test.

>>4137683
Stereotype threat.

>>4137683
Good thing women don't have to state their gender on real math tests.

>>4137673

Nope more like

>OH MY FUCKING GOD YOU GUYS ARE SUCH FUCKING SEXIST RACIST SHITS
But I'm not racist, I work with lots of women
>SHUT THE FUCK UP RACIST SEXIST PIG, SCIENCE IS SO FUCKING SEXIST AND RACIST
But it's not, there may be social forces stopping women and black people from getting into science, but it's not science's fault
>FUCK YOU SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST SEXIST RACIST

Almost every single comic has some sort of agenda-pushing message behind it. It's not about "hey guys, chill out, we're all the same, we all do science, here's a joke", it's all political preaching and LOL LONG SCIENCE WORDS WE'RE SO INTELLIGENT AREN'T YOU GLAD WE'RE SO INTELLIGENT AND BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE!

It's just boring and pretentious.

>>4137661
thats a cute strawman you got there.

>YEAAAH, WOMEN ARE GREAT AT MATH YOU SEXIST PIGS.

nope. the problem is that women suck at math.
they suggest that the culture teaches girls that "math is hard, glitter is fun!".

this sucks. the more bitches love math, the more bitches love mathematicians.

but, youre probably right, hot bitches should bang footballers instead of physicists.

>>4137703
the only people smbc mocks is christian fundamentalists.
the only agenda is pro-science. bitches suck at science, lets fix that.

counter example?

>>4136503
"Not bad."
>Realize I go to Carnegie Mellon
"...Fuck."

>>4136503

>Chech out this guy's link.

>Over 15 women

>No niggers

> mfw

>>4136472
>high school class
>mathematics
>mfw

>implying any math is being done in high schools

There have been studies on the subject before, far better done and with more telling results. Here's some analysis:

http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/women_and_math_the_gender_gap_brid
ged

Also, if you people think that ability to think in logical ways is shaped by gender, you have a hell of a lot to learn about gender theory, neural development in humans and other math-skilled animals, and the correlation of brain structure and hormones with memory and thinking patterns.

But you won't, because most of the people in /sci/ are just 15yo dumbasses who did some lab work and watched two Discovery Channel documentaries and now think they're scientists.

>>4137810
your link doesn't work

It does. If you're using an add-on to click the link, try copy-pasting it instead. On my screen, the "-ged" in "bridged" is not considered part of the link.

>>4137810
Why is it that there's constant attention and reform to girls doing better in math, despite the fact that as this shows boys do far worse in reading?

i hate it when asshole say math is masculine. it makes me feel bad for sucking at math but being good at everything else. it's not my fault my brain was made differently

>>4137960
>that feel when you are a boy who does worse at math and better in reading
>that feel when your index and ring finger are the same length even though you are straight.
>that feel when you fail to measure up to being a man.

>>4137960
cuz you can fix mathfails, readingfails go right to jail.

look the sex-disparity of prison populations.
we need to fix that shit first.

>>4137997
Exactly. There is gender inequality, but not the way most people think.

Math is for ugly guys, so what if women are not good at the subject. Look at those Stanford bitches.

>>4138023
are you suggesting reverse-sexism fills prisons?
like that powerful women walk around throwing law-abiding dudes in jail.
make a claim nigger, this ambiguity burnsmyass.

its the other side to "bitches are put down" coin.
dudes are taught to be aggressive to get what they want.
a culture that fixes one, fixes both.

>>4137981
I know that feel, bro.

>>4138035
So I thought about this in the shower, where the best ideas come from.
Mathematically, we're asking for how far something is from equality, that is we are taking a norm. Therefore by the commutativity of norms we can conclude men and women are hurt equally from this phenomenon.
My main problem is that one group complains, gets way more government funding, way more press, and way more support than the other despite the equivalence.

>>4138148
Where is there men in literature club?

>>4138038
>>4137981

>>4138148
>My main problem is that one group complains,
people piss and moan, dont piss and moan about it

>gets way more government funding, way more press, and way more support than the other
sauce?

well, its easy to say "girls arent getting into high-paying subjects STEM"

its harder to say "there are too many men in prison"
cuz you sound like a soft-on-crime pussy

one "feels" like a problem, one doesnt.
who cares about feels. results>feels.

thats why. it sucks, youre right.

>>4138205
Sauce is easy. Look up
society for women's ______
women in ______
etc.

> cuz you sound like a soft-on-crime pussy
are you 5?

>>4138243

>sauce
thanks for the link corroborating your assertion

>am i 5
are you saying that politicians and the-mouth-breathers dont get hardons for filling prisons?
can you just say explicitly what you are trying to imply?

>>4138403
You're right I didn't give you links, but I told you
how to find them. This is equally as good.
For a highly specific example just note affirmative action.

If you meant politicians you should have said so. I agree
with that, but you said 'you'. Surely from a scientific
perspective there's no reason why the problems differ.

>>4138435
>affirmative action.
is a laughing stock and political lightening rod.
calling something affirmative action is a good way to make sure it doesnt happen. (and thats fine with me personally)

>gets way more government funding
what gets more funding? what programs exist that address this problem? i am not aware of specific instances.

>way more press
i dont care about perceptions.
why do you care about what other assholes "feel"?

>way more support than the other
from who? do you mean that women want men to "feel bad" about some systemic problem, and that some men do?

how is that "support" thats just feelings and koombaya bullshit. who claims this actually improves anyones life?

>>4138462
>feelings and koombaya bullshit
>cuz you sound like a soft-on-crime pussy
>people piss and moan, dont piss and moan about it

Are you trying to sound like a Frank Miller character or what? Your internet tough guy act is amusing, but unconvincing.

> women aren't worse than men at math.

You know, I've always known this. However, I'd like to make this one clarifying point:

Women are, on average, worse then men at math because they have chosen to be worse at math. As it is taught to men, that our minds are our own, then it is true for women. If they had wanted to be mental equals then they would have performed to be such.

>>4138689
>calls me out on being a tough guy in a condescending manner
sup, fellow internet tough guy

the discourse is all "feels" and no results.
thats sociology not science.
we should be doing science.

what point that i have tried to make is unconvincing?

>>4138719
>asserts that women arent worse at math
>suggest that women are worse at math because they choose to be
someone never learned to properly form an argument. hit the books, bro.
you dont have to be like this your entire life.

>>4136870
>Math is feminine
Well fuck me.
When did this happen?
Because if math is feminine then by extension so is the rest of science

>>4136149
I for one attest that women have a significant advantage over men when it comes to learning.
They don't masturbate as much and therefore have more free time.