Recently, we noted the peculiar state of affairs by which atheists, who appear to dominate Top Science, have disproportionately progressive views and yet seem oblivious to the current progressive war on science. Here are two more shots at math:

Rochelle Gutiérrez

Title: Mathematx: Towards a way of Being

The relationship between humans, mathematics, and the planet has been one steeped too long in domination and destruction. What are appropriate responses to reverse such a relationship? How do we do work now (inside and outside of schools) that will reverberate and touch the lives of future generations? Drawing upon Indigenous worldviews to reconceptualize what mathematics is and how it is practiced, I argue for a movement against objects, truths, and knowledge towards a way of being in the world that is guided by first principles–mathematx. This shift from thinking of mathematics as a noun to mathematx as a verb holds potential for honouring our connections with each other as human and other-than-human persons, for balancing problem solving with joy, and for maintaining critical bifocality at the local and global level.

Rochelle Gutierrez works on equity issues in mathematics education, focusing primarily on how race, class, and language affect teaching and learning. – Mathematics Education and Society

10th International Conference, Hyderabad, India, Jan 28th – Feb 2nd, 2019More.

India would seem an odd venue for this sort of thing, given its remarkable science tradition, but Gutierrez is from a university in Illinois, which probably offers more favorable opportunities for progressivism.

And apparently, Evergreen State does not miss Bret Weinstein at his old stompin’ grounds:

This from the math program:

Women’s Work: Weaving Feminism and Math

… This program interrogates mathematics as a field of inquiry, asking what is recognized as math and what isn’t, who had and has access to math, and what privileges it gives access to. We will learn mathematics through a variety of hands-on applications and engage with science and technology studies, cultural studies, and feminist theory. This program is at an introductory level, and the humanities portion will involve substantial reading and writing.

During winter quarter, we will explore the intersection of mathematics with craft and management practices that historically have been done by women in traditional and indigenous cultures. We will also explore the way in which societies throughout the world use mathematics in divination rituals, to mark time, create art, and organize community responsibilities. Through a grounding in feminist critiques (from critical theory, science studies, and women-of-color feminisms), we will examine how mathematical knowledge becomes legitimized and the ways in which power structures influence what counts as knowledge. Students who successfully complete the math portion of winter quarter will earn four credits in math for liberal arts.

In spring quarter, we will focus on the contemporary discipline of mathematics and the historical events that have shaped what is commonly called “academic mathematics,” creating new roles and invisibilities for women from the industrial era to computer age. We’ll delve into the origins and development of computer technology, and the gendered and racialized aspects of its production and consumption. We’ll engage with the complexities of current debates about women and minorities in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education and industries. Students who successfully complete the math portion of spring quarter will earn four credits in algebraic thinking and will be prepared to take precalculus I. More.

Four credits in math and/or algebra for learning how to spout feminist propaganda even if you couldn’t figure out how many square tiles are needed for a new shop floor.

It boils down to: Statistically, failing schools can graduate more students in math. The students may not be able to perform or understand numerical or mathematical operations but they will be really, really woke. And anyone who bars their advancement knows what to expect. If they don’t, they can ask Bret.

Here’s a thought: Will Big Science begin to notice the problem only when they can blame it on people they don’t like anyway, including for example the ID guys? They can do that if they like. But they won’t be helping themselves.

*Hat tip:* *Daily Caller*

*See also:* Which side will atheists choose in the war on science? Considering how many atheists see science as a worthy successor to religion, they should think carefully about the current progressive assault on the core values of science.