digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

See the original image at newyorker.com —

Are our brains wired for math?

newyorker.com — According to Stanislas Dehaene, humans have an inbuilt “number sense” capable of some basic calculations and estimates. The problems start when we learn mathematics and have to perform procedures that are anything but instinctive.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • D3koy, on 02/29/2008, -13/+11Anyone else just skim through for the comics?
    • BIGMEX, on 02/29/2008, -5/+3I skimmed it ONLY for the comics.
    • thanhpham, on 02/29/2008, -1/+3yes, me have done this!
    • corsairstw, on 02/29/2008, -1/+2Ahh... I hope the average digg user doesn't epitomize the average modern citizen.
      • redxxx, on 03/04/2008, -0/+1You know, if you actually get much of anything out of comics in the New Yorker, you are probably a few dozens steps ahead of the average american.
        or are a pompous *****.
  • iRoy, on 02/29/2008, -2/+39Mine isn't.
    • PricklySponge, on 02/29/2008, -4/+8I hate math
      • boomqweeshaa, on 02/29/2008, -0/+5I like it, or rather, I like it when other people can do it well. I admire math from a distance.
    • sporg, on 02/29/2008, -0/+4" Im not interested in your money I'm looking for ways to understand our world! "
  • Uranium118, on 02/29/2008, -9/+2What about the brains of people before math was invented? Of course, one can argue that it always existed, it only needed to be discovered...
    • dext3r, on 02/29/2008, -7/+3the farther you get into math, the more you realize people just sat around and invented ***** like complex numbers to try to explain the world around them. i think all of those dudes were stoners or alcoholics to be able to just sit around and ***** with numbers all day.
      • Bisclavret, on 02/29/2008, -3/+6you sir speak the truth.
      • NSNick, on 02/29/2008, -0/+3Except that complex numbers are needed for ***** like electrical engineering.
        • dext3r, on 02/29/2008, -2/+2I never said they weren't useful and I know what they're used for...

          I said you really have to sit around for awhile to INVENT a whole idea of imaginary numbers. imaginary numbers don't just pop in your head. You have to think about it. Then when you take that and apply that to concepts like impedance and *****, its pretty amazing all that stuff works out. But I'm sure it works from years of sitting around and theorizing stuff, then taking measurements and verifying your theory.
      • noumuon, on 02/29/2008, -4/+3nobody "invented" an imaginary number. you come up with a name and assign it a letter. nobody "invented" the solution to X^2=-1... that was there all along... +-(-1)^(1/2) ... all someone did was say "hey, let's use i to represent this term and make working with it easier."
        • sougly, on 03/01/2008, -0/+2True. And the further you go in math, you'll realize that the things we label have an underlying structure that we continuously discover more and more of. We're not inventing anything in pure math.
          • noumuon, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1of course, but apparently there are enough people who either didn't understand what i was saying, or have no clue about mathematics.
  • ChiffX, on 02/29/2008, -3/+19I'll find a way to apply calculus when hunting a wild animal. Just you watch.
    • GeorgeStone2, on 02/29/2008, -2/+7No fair! You'll change the outcome by observing it!
    • Jpotts12, on 02/29/2008, -0/+4You could use calculus and physics to model the trajectory of your spear so that it strikes the wild animal
      • rootneg2, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1calculus is intuitive, it just loses that "intuitive meaning" and becomes hard to grasp once we start representing it in rigorous notation of operators, numerals, and functions.

        Most people actually have a fairly good intuitive understanding of how acceleration, speed, position are related; This *is* calculus, integration goes to the right, differentiation to the left. It's only when we need to make the statement precise and/or generalize the concept that it becomes difficult
        • sougly, on 03/01/2008, -0/+1Leibniz and Newton's ideas of calculus were also mostly intuitive and without many proofs. It wasn't until decades later that people decided to show the rigor in math instead of taking it for granted.
    • TheDHC, on 02/29/2008, -4/+2just plot the path of the trajectory of the spear on a graph, make a continuous line from it, find the equation of that line. then integrate that equation to find the area the spear covered. then convert the cubic units...
    • goldisalie, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Well, there is always the predator-prey model of linked differential equations. Its population dynamics, but essentially models exponential growth of a dependant pair of variables, ie predators and their prey. It basically says that the rate of growth of a population of prey species is related to the population itself (exponential growth) minus the interaction between predator and prey (the hunting and killing of wild animals), while at the same time saying that the rate of growth of the predator species is dependant on the volume (and growth) of its prey....

      Virtually all modelling of the real world is done with differential equations, and the predator-prey model is a famous example... so yes, its relevant to you hunting a wild animal... in a way :)
      • goldisalie, on 03/01/2008, -1/+0Why dig that down? You guys are freaks...
  • KaiSe7eN, on 02/29/2008, -8/+18Life is Mathematics.
    • fubuvsfitch, on 02/29/2008, -3/+4True, and furthermore, Mathematics is our way of making sense out of chaos.
    • BIGMEX, on 02/29/2008, -4/+2Life is art. Math is just the how.
    • swanny89, on 02/29/2008, -1/+5The Universe is mathematics.
    • BlueTunicLink, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Math is people?
    • linkin2, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Maths/Hillary 2008
  • fubuvsfitch, on 02/29/2008, -3/+1Ahh yes, the Categories of the Understanding. Gotta love 'em.
  • Chocobot, on 02/29/2008, -2/+6Mine sure as hell isn't.
  • BlueSunshine, on 02/29/2008, -2/+33My brain must have wireless.
  • KevinFederline, on 02/29/2008, -2/+9In cognitive science, incidents of brain damage are nature’s experiments. If a lesion knocks out one ability but leaves another intact, it is evidence that they are wired into different neural circuits.
    • sgtbutterscotch, on 02/29/2008, -1/+9And that was our Fun Fact of the Day Presented by Kevin Federline
      • jpmoney03, on 02/29/2008, -1/+2And here is one for tomorrow since it is close. 1/1.0125 is equal to .9876543210 repeating. Figured that out in International Finance by accident today and thought it was funny. Of course the problem from class was 8/8.10 but I am a slight math nerd so the reduced form was more fun.
        • noumuon, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2except that's not what it equals. 0.987654320 repeating. you're close, but still wrong.
    • lazersailer, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Maybe include the fact that you're straight quoting the article next time.
  • dvsbastard, on 02/29/2008, -2/+20Yes, I'm wired for meth...

    Wait I think I read that wrong...
  • Phatlip012, on 02/29/2008, -2/+2Nope.
  • peterjmag, on 02/29/2008, -2/+2Haven't you ever seen Contact?
  • Bologner, on 02/29/2008, -3/+38Why is mine hardwired for porn?
  • rolf, on 02/29/2008, -3/+8Like anything, practice makes perfect. I'm sure our brains weren't specifically wired for reading by nature, but most of us will manage to read this post in less than 15 seconds. The problem is that we don't apply much of what we learned often enough to make it a virtuoso skill -- especially higher level maths. Overlearning they call it. Use it or lose it. Too easy to learn calculus these days and then let Maple and all that do all the work. My Aunt almost completely lost an entire secondary language he was fluid in 25 years ago (although relearning it should be much faster for him than a beginner) just because she never uses it anymore.
    • jocnnor, on 02/29/2008, -1/+20I think your aunt forgetting a second language pales in comparison to her becoming a he
      • samssf, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2I think it's the other way around... he became a she.
    • gr00vy, on 02/29/2008, -0/+4True. But FLUENT. Not "fluid".
    • samssf, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2WTF.
    • EtherGnat, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1It took me 20 seconds to read your post. I'm an idiot. :(
  • thanhpham, on 02/29/2008, -2/+3this is wonderful article!
  • Hobbes24, on 02/29/2008, -2/+8anyone else stop after page 1?
    • CharlesSaint, on 02/29/2008, -0/+6I scrolled down the first page and said aloud "***** that!" when I realized it was only one of five. I'll have to read this later when I'm in the mood.
    • Gizza, on 02/29/2008, -1/+3I read the first page then went to click next and realised it was 5 pages. Then i just skipped through to read the cartoons.
  • saska, on 02/29/2008, -1/+6I read that whole damned thing hoping it would tell me why I taught myself stoichiometry, tested out of geometry, and can solve algebraic story problems in my head, but failed calculus four times.

    Conclusion? My parents must have dropped me on my head.
    • rolf, on 02/29/2008, -2/+2They say in college, Calculus II is often the class where they seperate the students who can manage higher maths and those who can't.... it may be how the notation trips people up or other factors like having it too easy up to the point and when challenged they trip up.

      I had the same problem with trigonomety. One summer, I just got a better textbook than the school offered and started doing every other problem (odds). It seemed to work well enough that I tested out with a 100%. If I still didn't understand a chapter, I'd go back and do all the evens. For calculus, I would suggest this book:
      http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-Analytic-Geometry-8 ...

      It's pretty clear (as clear as a calc book can be), but more than that, they have a free website where you can look up the explicitly clear step-by-step solutions to all the odd problems (you have to pay for the evens):
      http://calcchat.com/

      Often times you only get the answers for that price and have to buy an often-shoddy solution's manual.
      • stuman77, on 02/29/2008, -1/+0I hear you. as a Mechanical Engineering undergrad, I had to go through Calc 1-3, as well as Ordinary Differential Equations. I have to say, out of all those, Calc 2 was the hardest. It's very non-intuitave, in that it's more like mathematical tenchique and less like real world application.
        • jpmoney03, on 02/29/2008, -3/+1***** I got screwed in Calc 2 because I learned Calc in high school using a graphing calculator then I took Calc 2 in college and they told me I couldn't use my graphing calc. It was gay as hell I got a 4 on the Calc 1 Ap test then I almost failed Calc 2 in College because it had almost no relation to what I had learned in High School.
    • Bense, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Hey I'm in calc 1 right now and I'm using this exact book!!
    • ph070sh0p, on 02/29/2008, -2/+1It's weird. I've always been strong in math and science and am taking calculus I this year as a junior. I find it very easy even though I know a lot of my friends are struggling a little. I do agree that the subject does separate those who understand math conceptually and those who rely simply on memorization. Spelling for me is really hard so i think that people are usually just geared towards mathematics or language.
      • saska, on 02/29/2008, -2/+1I'm way too old to be offended by your comment at this point, but just for the record -- I never took geometry. I tested out of it without ever taking a class. I had mono the two weeks they taught stoichiometry in chemistry, so I just figured it out while I was home sick by reading the worksheets. In other words, I do understand "how math works." Or at least how algebra and geometry/theorems/proofs work.

        I think I had crappy teachers in calculus -- teachers who relied on memorization to teach the material. No one could ever adequately explain to me why a particular imaginary number or calculative method worked the way they said it did, and I never got it as a result.
    • BlueTunicLink, on 02/29/2008, -0/+3Wait until you get to Diff Eq.
    • ZenMojo, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyscalculia
      Actually, I read an article in Discover magazine once, but I'm having trouble finding it on Google, that made the case that advanced math isn't "real" or "logical." That is, it becomes more of an abstract art instead of a hard logical system and therefore less and less people can make a connection with it regardless of their reasoning capacity. In other words, you can't "touch" the math the more advanced it gets.
  • Ranneko, on 02/29/2008, -3/+2Maths
  • joshuagor44, on 02/29/2008, -2/+2I remember a few years ago I was reading an article in the newspaper about a village whose inhabitants had no perception of numbers. There was a picture of a fisherman with two fish in his little boat and the author explained that if you were to take one out, he wouldn't notice.
  • jaybuster, on 02/29/2008, -13/+3what do you call two mexican guys playing basketball?
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .




    Juan on Juan
  • gr00vy, on 02/29/2008, -4/+2I personally think that we have a built in sense of value, of greater and smaller, and that we have a biologic understanding of the golden mean and Fibonacci sequences. This lets us enter agreements, understand what is fair, understand money and negotiation, create a meaning of beauty and desire. It is around us, visible from the telescope and on the beach. It gives us the perception of depth, and close enough and too far.

    This is our "number sense". It really has nothing to do with numbers and mathematics per se. This is the language we assign to this, and it is when we start to manipulate the language without the meaning, and we can discern larger meaning, solely based on the language, that it becomes hard. But there are those that can do it very well, and for everyone else, there is Europe.
    • ZenMojo, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Take an American mathematician and stick him in Europe? Might as well try teaching a bedouin to surf.
  • sleepyjjk, on 02/29/2008, -1/+3I read through the whole article, and I think it's quite interesting, especially if you're into neurology, human evolution, and philosophy.

    There's this one philosophical question whether or not physicalism is the same as consciousness (or mentalism). Meaning, if you knew the physics of consciousness, does that mean you truly understand consciousness? There's this article which describes how it is not possible to do that and used the example of how we can never understand a bat even if we understood the wiring of a bat.

    I believe that we can understand consciousness, at least to a good degree, if we did understand the physical explanation of it. This article addresses some of those things.
    • ph070sh0p, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1I don't believe it wise to think that we will never be able to understand something.
  • brendanryder, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Hell no
  • jaybuster, on 02/29/2008, -2/+4this is how our brains are wired. http://tolppa.apina.biz/3346.jpg
  • Gloogle, on 02/29/2008, -0/+3I can't even add nor subtract...
  • rambn, on 02/29/2008, -2/+1sounds like ***** to me.
  • annenk38, on 02/29/2008, -3/+3Our brains are wired only for the most rudimentary of what you may call "math", such as bean counting. Everything else had to be invented. You may have heard the statement "mathematics is the language of the universe". This is plain false. Mathematics is the language humans invented to compress information. Consider most basic stuff -- numerals. It would take a million beans to express the number "one million", but using decimal system, we only need 7 decimal places.
    • MadOtaku, on 02/29/2008, -1/+2It is the language of the universe; we just have a very efficient notation. If you really wanted to represent one million with beans though, all the same operations and other rules of mathematics would work and that's why they say it's the language of the universe.
    • Jpotts12, on 02/29/2008, -2/+1Mathematics is simply an invented language used to describe nature and communicate information about it. Quantitative relationships exist independently of mathematics. It wouldn't matter if instead of saying Force = mass * acceleration we said Shoe = box * parachute, or if instead of using x and y in algebra we used : ) and : (, or if instead of saying humans have 2 eyes we said we have 3 as long as these labels referred to the same quantitative information.
      • Jpotts12, on 02/29/2008, -0/+0Oh no I'm getting dugg down for saying something intelligent!! Oh no!!
    • duality, on 02/29/2008, -1/+3"It would take a million beans to express the number "one million", but using decimal system, we only need 7 decimal places."

      Woohoo for the decimal number system that can represent quantitative values in O(log n) space.
      • rootneg2, on 02/29/2008, -1/+2O(log n) ? weak....

        Steinhaus Moser notation ftw!
    • izackcarson, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1While math is definitely invented language, you do have to notice things in order to start talking about them. A color blind person is not going to help invent words for subtle color changes. Math blind folks would never have inveted the symbology and equation structure of calculus +. People with math sense created the complex, beautiful math language we now have.
  • neocognitism, on 02/29/2008, -6/+1So what he's saying is, everybody is genetically qualified to work at McDonalds, but try and go for manager and that's when real talent and dedication kick in.
  • say592, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Isnt the whole world wired for numbers though, as math is the expressive language for all of science?
  • thetedster180, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2I totally thought that said meth not math
  • KingBroseph, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2What about some savants that can calculate decimals more places than a calculator without having to really think about it? Or the savant that named Pi to the 25,000th place just from his head? There appears to be something in our brain that is wired for numbers.
    • arkitect, on 02/29/2008, -1/+1Not necessarily. You assume what they are doing is inherently mathematical. The article mentions that we can count small numbers or compare numbers to others without counting. There is nothing mathematical about knowing 7 is less than 8 or 5x5 is 25 if we give a snap answer. Also, I can probably identify four of something without manually counting in my head. I would guess most mathematical savants aren't really doing mathematics and there brain patterns would be different than a person doing the same operation normally.
  • murlox, on 02/29/2008, -2/+1The article is too long. I need the summary.
  • BlueTunicLink, on 02/29/2008, -0/+3That's because our brains are part of a supercomputer solving the answer to life, the universe, and everything.
  • Havoc737903, on 02/29/2008, -0/+3Buried for the article not using ***** paragraphs.
  • stikkitjim, on 02/29/2008, -1/+12 + 2 = 5 .... I love Big Brother!
  • h0ser, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1it took millions of years to learn how to walk on two legs. It's the same with math, we know a bit, but its hard to balance the real meanings behind it. You use lots of brain power and lots of math naturally in your head when you walk or pick something up. You're calculating how much weight you're able to hold and how fast you'll be able to move etc. The only difference is that our brain processes it through natural thought. Just imagine what we'd be like in a few thousand years after out actions of doing math in a language form begins to hardwire itself into our DNA and we are able to do highly complex calculations as easily as we can wave hello.
  • DestroyFascism, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2Damn it, I was fine until I went to grade school. Then I got confused!
  • Solis, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Seriously, I'm lucky if I can even add anymore. Multiplication and dividing is beyond me. Subtracting is even very difficult. I'm hardly wired for math at all.

    I got lost after 7th grade and was never able to catch up again. I don't even know if it's possible for me to learn math anymore. Do they even offer rudimentary mathematics for adults? Least I don't think they do where I live.

    I need to move....
  • cowkicker, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1SSSSSS

    its maths, not math.
  • trollick, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1NO. Brains are hardwired for patter recognition.
  • Ramble, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Like many people, I study higher maths yet can't add, subtract, divide or multiply to save my own life.
  • Ringwurm, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1I know mine's not.
  • izackcarson, on 02/29/2008, -0/+0Number sense is definitely for real. However, if you don't have it, you can slow down and practice.

    I know, working at something sucks.
  • redxxx, on 03/04/2008, -0/+1Wish I could digg this twice for the choice to use 6x7 as an example.
  • claudia7950, on 03/12/2008, -0/+0I am with iRoy, my brain has no space for math
  • LimEeHai, on 04/10/2008, -0/+1A very informative post on the effect of learning math and its relation to the brain. It really makes one think what is going on in our brain!
  • lolo2007, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0I got lost after 7th grade and was never able to catch up again. I don't even know if it's possible for me to learn math anymore. Do they even offer rudimentary mathematics for adults? Least I don't think they do where I live.

    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/6/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/3/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/15/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/20/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/6/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/8/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/9/
    http://vb.paramegsoft.com/10/
  • al876ani, on 07/29/2008, -0/+0http://forums.m7taj.com http://www.m7taj.com http://games.m7taj.com http://photos.m7taj.com http://forums.m7taj.com/thread20951.html http://www.rooo7i.net/card http://forums.m7taj.com/thread26590.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread26567.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread26046.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread25796.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread25978.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread25816.html
    http://chat.graaam.com
    http://www.graaam.com
    http://games.graaam.com
    http://directory.graaam.com
    http://voice.graaam.com
  • meznh, on 08/17/2008, -0/+0
    http://mobile.meznh.com/
    http://www.meznh.com/
    http://chat.meznh.com/
    http://vb.meznh.com/
    http://games.meznh.com/
    http://chat.meznh.com/index_chat.html
    http://www.meznh.com/index_chat.html
    http://chat.meznh.com/voice.htm
    http://www.meznh.com/voice.html
    http://chat.meznh.com/saudi.html
    http://video.meznh.com/
    http://up.meznh.com/
    http://msn.meznh.com/
    http://www.meznh.com/name/
    http://www.meznh.com/islam
    http://games.meznh.com/c22-0.html
    http://vb.meznh.com/showthread.php?t=36847
    http://smilies.meznh.com/
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.