About

99% Invisible is a sound-rich, narrative podcast hosted by Roman Mars about all the thought that goes into the things we don’t think about — the unnoticed architecture and design that shape our world.

(introduction from 99percentinvisible.org)

Abstract

Should philosophy help address the problems of non-philosophers or should it be something isolated both from other disciplines and from the lay public? This question became more than academic for philosophers working in UK universities with the introduction of societal impact assessment in the national research evaluation exercise, the REF. Every university department put together a submission describing its broader impact in case narratives, and these were graded. Philosophers were required to participate. The resulting narratives are publicly available and provide a unique resource permitting a more comprehensive, empirically based consideration of philosophy’s influence outside the academy than has hitherto been possible. This paper takes advantage of this data to develop a cartography of the ways in which philosophers engage society in their work. We identify five approaches: dissemination, engagement, provocations, living philosophy, and philosophy of X. We compare these along the six dimensions proposed by Frodeman and Briggle to characterize the ideal field philosopher. We conclude that there are multiple ways of being a field philosopher, which vary in their emphasis. This pluralism bodes well for the expansion of philosophy’s societal influence, since there are routes available to suit different preferences.

An Aristotelian Philosophy of Mathematics breaks the impasse between Platonist and nominalist views of mathematics. Neither a study of abstract objects nor a mere language or logic, mathematics is a science of real aspects of the world as much as biology is. For the first time, a philosophy of mathematics puts applied mathematics at the centre. Quantitative aspects of the world such as ratios of heights, and structural ones such as symmetry and continuity, are parts of the physical world and are objects of mathematics. Though some mathematical structures such as infinities may be too big to be realized in fact, all of them are capable of being realized. Informed by the author's background in both philosophy and mathematics, but keeping to simple examples, the book shows how infant perception of patterns is extended by visualization and proof to the vast edifice of modern pure and applied mathematical knowledge.

(blurb from booktopia.com.au)

Abstract

Natural history collections are critical for modern scientific investigations, which are greatly expanding on the potential data applications of historic specimens. However, using these specimens outside their original intent introduces biases and potential misinterpretations. Anthropogenic biases can be introduced at any point during the life of museum specimens, from collection, preparation, and accession, to digitization. These biases can cause significant effects when the user is unaware of the collection context, as specific collection biases are often known anecdotally, but not ubiquitously. In this case study, the University of Kansas collection of Spence Shale Lagerstätte material was examined for anthropogenic biases using a collections inventory, interviews with stakeholders, and a literature review. Biases were found related to collector interest, locality preference, and researcher interest and specialization. These biases create a distorted view on the diversity and ecology of the Spence Shale, and need to be considered in future research.

Abstract

Our objective in this paper is twofold: first, we intend to address the tenability of the enactivist middle way between realism and idealism, as it is proposed in The Embodied Mind. We do so by taking the enactivist conception of bringing forth a world literally in three conceptual levels: enaction, niche construction and social construction. Based on this proposal, we claim that enactivism is compatible with the idea of an independent reality without committing to the claim that organisms have cognitive access to a world composed of properties specified prior to any cognitive activity. Our second goal is to show that our literal interpretation of bringing forth a world not only sustains the legitimacy of the middle way, but it also allows us to revive the conception of evolution as natural drift—which is perhaps the least examined aspect of the original enactivist theory and is central to the understanding of cognition in an enactive way. Natural drift focuses on how structural couplings between organism and environment trigger viable pathways of maintenance and reproduction, instead of selecting the most adapted trait to a pregiven environment. Thus, although enactivists typically do not explore the consequences of their views regarding evolutionary dynamics, we show how natural drift provides a suitable starting point.

Abstract

I claim that professional philosophers need to seriously rethink how they do philosophy, where they do philosophy, and with whom they do philosophy. My suggestion is that they “leave the shade” of their philosophical bubbles by making their work accessible to each other and to the public and by engaging with thinkers outside of philosophy. I argue that if philosophers do not “leave the shade,” we may witness the decline and even the eradication of the field of philosophy, as we know it.

While you might not know what these words mean, you have definitely seen them in action. You can watch Netflix documentaries with closed captions. You can adjust the contrast and font size on your phone for easy reading. You can voice activate almost any device in your home now. You may also be seeing equity design in action following the death of George Flyod and other black lives. So, here’s a quick guide to understanding the differences and similarities between them.

(introduction from eileenasher.com)

Introduction

A basic idea of "mathematical sciences" is a combination of broad ranged research areas holding a central position in fundamental sciences. Although they include traditional pure mathematics as a core, mathematical sciences indeed expand toward applied sciences which plays roles for development of sciences and technologies as well as structural reorganization of our society.

In the "Division of Mathematical Sciences," we will cultivate students' basic abilities of logical thinking, scientific analysis, and creative conception through the process to generalize and abstract concepts of numbers, expressions, and shapes. Additionally, we will foster the spirit of scientific reasoning to see phenomena and judge circumstances in the real world. We will raise people who have those abilities summed up and merged. They would play a leading role in various areas in our society as experts with high skills and proper judgment.

In general, mathematics or mathematical sciences are expected to be a foundation for all kinds of sciences. That may be true. However, we would like the students to realize that they have a comprehensive structure built by huge amount of results from the past and expanding now for the future. We will strongly make it emphatic that mathematics or mathematical sciences are themselves interesting objects for an extensive investigation.

(introduction from http://www.ms.oita-u.ac.jp/)

Summary

Experts translate the latest findings on embodied cognition from neuroscience, psychology, and cognitive science to inform teaching and learning pedagogy.

Embodied cognition represents a radical shift in conceptualizing cognitive processes, in which cognition develops through mind-body environmental interaction. If this supposition is correct, then the conventional style of instruction—in which students sit at desks, passively receiving information—needs rethinking. Movement Matters considers the educational implications of an embodied account of cognition, describing the latest research applications from neuroscience, psychology, and cognitive science and demonstrating their relevance for teaching and learning pedagogy. The contributors cover a range of content areas, explaining how the principles of embodied cognition can be applied in classroom settings.

After a discussion of the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of embodied cognition, contributors describe its applications in language, including the areas of handwriting, vocabulary, language development, and reading comprehension; STEM areas, emphasizing finger counting and the importance of hand and body gestures in understanding physical forces; and digital learning technologies, including games and augmented reality. Finally, they explore embodied learning in the social-emotional realm, including how emotional granularity, empathy, and mindfulness benefit classroom learning.

Movement Matters introduces a new model, translational learning sciences research, for interpreting and disseminating the latest empirical findings in the burgeoning field of embodied cognition. The book provides an up-to-date, inclusive, and essential resource for those involved in educational planning, design, and pedagogical approaches.

Contributors

Dor Abrahamson, Martha W. Alibali, Petra A. Arndt, Lisa Aziz-Zadeh, Jo Boaler, Christiana Butera, Rachel S. Y. Chen, Charles P. Davis, Andrea Marquardt Donovan, Inge-Marie Eigsti, Virginia J. Flood, Jennifer M. B. Fugate, Arthur M. Glenberg, Ligia E. Gómez, Daniel D. Hutto, Karin H. James, Mina C. Johnson-Glenberg, Michael P. Kaschak, Markus Kiefer, Christina Krause, Sheila L. Macrine, Anne Mangen, Carmen Mayer, Amanda L. McGraw, Colleen Megowan-Romanowicz, Mitchell J. Nathan, Antti Pirhonen, Kelsey E. Schenck, Lawrence Shapiro, Anna Shvarts, Yue-Ting Siu, Sofia Tancredi, Chrystian Vieyra, Rebecca Vieyra, Candace Walkington, Christine Wilson-Mendenhall, Eiling Yee

(summary from mitpress.mit.edu)

Abstract

Emergent realities such as the COVID-19 pandemic and corresponding “infodemic,” the resurgence of Black Lives Matter, climate catastrophe, and fake news, misinformation, disinformation, and so on challenge information researchers to reconsider the limitations and potential of the user-centered paradigm that has guided much library and information studies (LIS) research. In order to engage with these emergent realities, understanding who people are in terms of their social identities, social power, and as epistemic agents—that is, knowers, speakers, listeners, and informants—may provide insight into human information interactions. These are matters of epistemic injustice. Drawing heavily from Miranda Fricker's work Epistemic Injustice: Power & the Ethics of Knowing, I use the concept of epistemic injustice (testimonial, systematic, and hermeneutical injustice) to consider people as epistemic beings rather than “users” in order to potentially illuminate new understandings of the subfields of information behavior and information literacy. Focusing on people as knowers, speakers, listeners, and informants rather than “users” presents an opportunity for information researchers, practitioners, and LIS educators to work in service of the epistemic interests of people and in alignment with liberatory aims.

Abstract

Fostering entrepreneurship and inclusive societies are on top of EU policy agenda. This article is bringing together both aims by discussing a social innovation framework for inclusive entrepreneurial education for persons with disabilities. Similar to other disadvantaged groups, persons with disabilities can benefit from entrepreneurial skills for self-management or, on a next level, for starting own, opportunity-driven businesses. The framework suggests several building blocks considered necessary for successful entrepreneurial education for the beneficiaries. First, it is approaching the framework through a social innovation perspective. In doing so, it suggests a social innovation ecosystem perspective to operationalize all relevant stakeholders and contextual aspects relevant for the framework. Second, it suggests to build on socially innovative, hence novel, practices by starting from co-creation and co-production in order to meet individual demands and needs of learners. Furthermore, it takes the concept of universal design into account as it holds major implications for inclusive entrepreneurial education for persons with disabilities and underlines the need of different, more suitable practices in entrepreneurship education and beyond, toward an inclusive learning ecosystem.

Abstract

The notion of recognition is an ethically potent resource for understanding human relational needs; and its negative counterpart, misrecognition, an equally potent resource for critique. Axel Honneth’s rich account focuses our attention on recognition’s role in securing basic self-confidence, moral self-respect, and self-esteem. With these loci of recognition in place, we are enabled to raise the intriguing question whether each of these may be extended to apply specifically to the epistemic dimension of our agency and selfhood. Might we talk intelligibly—while staying in tune with Honneth’s concepts and their Hegelian key—of a generic idea of epistemic recognition? Such an idea might itself be seen to apply at the same three levels to indicate: first, basic epistemic self-confidence; second, our status as epistemically responsible; and third, a certain epistemic self-esteem that reflects the epistemic esteem we receive from others. The papers in this volume surely sound a chord in the affirmative, and together they steer us towards a multifaceted conception of how epistemic injustice is related to epistemic misrecognition, and indeed how we might construe a positive relation of epistemic recognition.

Abstract

In developing her ethics of care, Eva Kittay discusses the vulnerability and voluntarism models of obligation. Kittay uses the vulnerability model to demonstrate that we have some obligations to care, even for those to whom we’ve made no promise or with whom we have no agreement. Kittay’s primary interest is in our moral obligations. I use this distinction to propose a new way to understand our epistemic obligations to one another. After explaining Kittay’s models and their epistemic analogs, I use epistemic vulnerability to explain two cases.

Summary

• The Western concept of mathematics with which we are all so familiar is by no means the only one

• Many, if not all, ancient cultures developed some sort of mathematical system

• It is important to appreciate and understand the worth and merit of these systems from ancient but often living and evolving cultures as occur in indigenous communities today.

• Ethnomathematics can be more relevant in some communities and cultures than ‘Western’ mathematics

• An understanding of different ethnomathematic systems can enhance our greater understanding of mathematics, so we are not limited by western perspectives alone.

(summary from science.org.au)

Introduction

The first International Conference on Ethnomathematics (ICEM-4) in the United States included participants from 20 different countries and 20 U.S. states, all concerned with how mathematics is perceived, learned, and taught in the amazing array of cultures that human beings have formed. The gathering was held the week before MathFest 2010 at Towson University in Maryland. The ICEM-4 conference was an interesting juxtaposition with MathFest, with many common themes and fascinating divergences.

(introduction from MAA Focus)

Introduction

For the last five years or so, I’ve been putting out a weekly podcast devoted to the entire History of Philosophy, with the emphasis on “entire.” The slogan of the series is “without any gaps,” which is intended to convey that I do not just cover the familiar names—Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes—but also lesser-known, “minor” figures and movements. I’ve also tackled topics outside the standard canon of European thought, looking extensively at philosophy in the Islamic world and, more recently (with the help of co-author Jonardon Ganeri), philosophy in ancient India. The latter expansion of the project has been particularly eye-opening for me. My own area of research includes philosophy in Arabic, so the Islamic world was to a large extent familiar territory. But everything I know about the Upanishads, early Buddhism, the Mahabharata, and so on, I have learned in the past year or so.

(introduction from apaonline.org)

Abstract

Mathematics education for students with dis/abilities has a legacy of exclusion; its scholarship has been dominated by ableist perspective: a focus on rote mathematics facts, procedural instruction, and a narrow range of mathematics content. Grounded in critical pedagogy and critical disabilities studies, we argue for a shift in the focus away from the student as the site of defect and intervention to recognize the complex embodiment of dis/ability as a process produced within historical, political, social, and material contexts. The theoretical assumptions and guiding principles for a framework of culturally responsive and relational understanding of dis/ability will be shared together with a case of such an approach in classroom practice. The paper advances efforts to support all learners in robust mathematics learning communities and to situate research from perspectives that acknowledge the situated, interactional nature of ability, identity, and achievement.

Eugenia Cheng's answers to Gracie Cunningham's questions.

Abstract

Underlying the development of inclusive design approaches seems to be the assumption that inclusivity automatically leads to good design. What good design means, however, and how this relates to inclusivity, is not very clear. In this paper we try to shed light on these questions. In doing so, we provide an argument for conceiving design as a deliberative enterprise. We point out how inclusivity and normative objectivity can be reconciled, by defining the norm of good design in terms of a deliberative cooperation between designers and the people they design for. In this view, a design is inclusive when it is produced by exploiting the information and competences at the disposal of the designer and the people she designs for in qualified circumstances.

Introduction

Inclusive Design is a methodology, born out of digital environments, that enables and draws on the full range of human diversity. Most importantly, this means including and learning from people with a range of perspectives.

(introduction from microsoft.com)

Inclusive Design principles

Inclusive Design is human-centered design. It considers the full range of human diversity, including ability, language, culture, gender, age and other forms of human difference, as part of the design process.

Inclusive Design triggers innovation, opens new markets and creates richer engagement with customers and citizens.

(introduction from centreforinclusivedesign.org.au)

Introduction

Every design decision has the potential to include or exclude customers. Inclusive design emphasizes the contribution that understanding user diversity makes to informing these decisions, and thus to including as many people as possible. User diversity covers variation in capabilities, needs and aspirations.

(introduction from inclusivedesigntoolkit.com)

Plain English summary

Working in partnership with people, patients, carers and communities is an important and expected component of health-related research activity in the UK. Within health research, public engagement (usually defined as raising awareness of research) and patient involvement (usually defined as actively involving people in research) have traditionally been seen as separate but have much to gain from working together towards a common goal of better health outcomes for all. This paper describes a unique approach taken by the Public Programmes Team - an interdisciplinary group of public engagement specialists embedded within translational research infrastructure and delivery in Manchester in the North West of England. We propose a new model of professional practice – a 'cycle' of engagement and involvement – innovating across the complementary fields of public engagement and patient involvement, and working inclusively and in partnership with people in health research. Further, our approach capitalises on strategic collaboration offering economies of scale and a joined up way of working. Through preliminary case studies exemplifying the impact of our approach, our achievements and learning between April 2017 and March 2018, we propose that our approach has the potential to be replicated elsewhere. Our ambition is to boldly experiment, learn and reflect, responsibly and based on evidence and partnerships, using methods of engagement that address issues of social justice.

About

Intellectual Mathematics is written for the intellectual fulfilment of the reader. This means that it seeks the most satisfying explanations, the most vivid illustrations, and the most compelling motivations. It also means that it engages our intuition whenever possible.

Traditional mathematics is written for robots and nitpickers. It is obsessed with being technically correct at the expense of all else. Again and again the ugliest proofs and the most contrived order of presentation are favoured in the traditional approach on the sole grounds that they are the easiest to write down in a manner that cannot be faulted with respect to logical correctness.

In Intellectual Mathematics, when facing a new concept, our primary goal is to understand how and why it works. The standard by which this is judged is our own sense of satisfaction and understanding. Emotion, passion, and the joy of insight are therefore essential components of Intellectual Mathematics.

In traditional mathematics, when facing a new concept, the goal is to reach the requisite results without making any technical errors. Crossing the t’s and dotting the i’s are the alpha and omega of traditional mathematics. Traditional mathematics is anti-human. It fetishises robotic manipulation of symbols and involves no emotions except a crippling fear of genuine and free human thought.

In traditional mathematics, the character and bulk of any given proof usually has next to nothing to do with why that particular theorem is true and everything to do with incidental technicalities. Students soon get the hint that mathematics is not about actually thinking and trying to figure stuff out; rather it is clearly a formal game completely divorced from common sense.

Indeed, formal proofs are sometimes accompanied by an informal heuristic argument, only to be followed immediately by the admonition that “of course this is not a proof!” Much more than giving the student some shred of intuitive insight, such passages convey more than anything that honest thinking is futile and impermissible in mathematics because a proof only counts if it is packed with technical jargon that has nothing whatsoever to do with the specific matter at hand.

Kant said: “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one understanding without guidance from another. … Sapere Aude! Dare to know! Have courage to use your own understanding! Thus is the motto of Enlightenment.”

This is also the motto of Intellectual Mathematics. Stop thinking that a mathematical argument is a bureaucratic form submitted for approval to the Gods of Pedantry. A mathematical argument is written for you. Stop worrying about what “they” want you to do. Have the courage to think for yourself.

(introduction from intellectualmathematics.com)

Abstract

Freire and Macedo analyse the connection between literacy and politics according to whether it produces existing social relations, or introduces a new set of cultural practices that promote democratic and emancipatory change.

Introduction

Gubbi Gubbi artist Maggie-Jean Douglas has won the 2021 National NAIDOC Poster competition from a record 260 entries.

(introduction from naidoc.org.au)

Abstract

Brain areas within the lateral parietal cortex (LPC) and ventral temporal cortex (VTC) have been shown to code for abstract quantity representations and for symbolic numerical representations, respectively. To explore the fast dynamics of activity within each region and the interaction between them, we used electrocorticography recordings from 16 neurosurgical subjects implanted with grids of electrodes over these two regions and tracked the activity within and between the regions as subjects performed three different numerical tasks. Although our results reconfirm the presence of math-selective hubs within the VTC and LPC, we report here a remarkable heterogeneity of neural responses within each region at both millimeter and millisecond scales. Moreover, we show that the heterogeneity of response profiles within each hub mirrors the distinct patterns of functional coupling between them. Our results support the existence of multiple bidirectional functional loops operating between discrete populations of neurons within the VTC and LPC during the visual processing of numerals and the performance of arithmetic functions. These findings reveal information about the dynamics of numerical processing in the brain and also provide insight into the fine-grained functional architecture and connectivity within the human brain.

Welcome To Mathematical Communication

Mathematical Communication is a developing collection of resources for engaging students in writing and speaking about mathematics, whether for the purpose of learning mathematics or of learning to communicate as mathematicians.

(introduction from mathcomm.org)

OUR MISSION

MAP’s mission is to address structural injustices in academic philosophy and to remove barriers that impede participation in academic philosophy for members of marginalized groups. Through our international organizing team and graduate student-led network of autonomous chapters around the world, we aim to examine and dismantle mechanisms that prevent students from marginalized groups from participating in academic philosophy, as well as to promote philosophical work done from marginalized perspectives, and help improve working conditions for scholars from marginalized backgrounds.

(introduction from http://www.mapforthegap.com/)

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to convince anti-realists that their correct intuitions against the metaphysical inflationism derived from some versions of mathematical realism do not force them to embrace non-standard, epistemic approaches to truth and existence. It is also an attempt to convince mathematical realists that they do not need to implement their perfectly sound and judicious intuitions with the anti-intuitive developments that render full-blown mathematical realism into a view which even Gödel considered objectionable (Gödel 1995, p. 150).

I will argue for the following two theses: (i) that realism, in its standard characterization, is our default position, a position in agreement with our pre-theoretical intuitions and with the results of our best semantic theories, and (ii) that most of the metaphysical qualms usually related to it depends on a poor understanding of truth and existence as higher-order concepts.

PIKSI-Boston (Philosophy In An Inclusive Key Summer Institute) is an organization that runs philosophy summer schools for under-represented undergraduates from around the US.

Abstract

Drawing on the built environment concept of “inclusive design” and its emphasis on creating accessible environments for all persons regardless of ability, I suggest that a central task for feminist disability theory is to redesign foundational philosophical concepts to present opportunities rather than barriers to inclusion for people with disability. Accounts of autonomy within liberal philosophy stress self‐determination and the dignity of all individual persons, but have excluded people with intellectual disability from moral and political theories by denying their capacity for individual autonomy, seen as a chief marker of moral personhood. This paper modifies and extends feminist theories of relational autonomy by arguing for the need to view autonomy as a feature of persons that is manifested only through relations of support, advocacy, and enablement. An “inclusively designed,” relational account negotiates the tensions encountered in attempts to apply autonomy to people with high support needs, and politicizes the concept as an advocacy tool for people with intellectual disability and their allies.

This collection of papers has its origin in a conference held at the University of Toronto in June of 1988. The theme of the conference was Physicalism in Mathematics: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Math- ematics. At the conference, papers were read by Geoffrey Hellman (Minnesota), Yvon Gauthier (Montreal), Michael Hallett (McGill), Hartry Field (USC), Bob Hale (Lancaster & St Andrew's), Alasdair Urquhart (Toronto) and Penelope Maddy (Irvine). This volume supplements updated versions of six of those papers with contributions by Jim Brown (Toronto), John Bigelow (La Trobe), John Burgess (Princeton), Chandler Davis (Toronto), David Papineau (Cambridge), Michael Resnik (North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Peter Simons (Salzburg) and Crispin Wright (St Andrews & Michigan). Together they provide a vivid, expansive snapshot of the exciting work which is currently being carried out in philosophy of mathematics. Generous financial support for the original conference was provided by the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada, the British Council, and the Department of Philosophy together with the Office of Internal Relations at the University of Toronto. Additional support for the production of this volume was gratefully received from the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada.

(description from booktopia.com.au)

What we are about

Psyche & Society, directed by Dr. Talia Morag, organises events that explore the potential of psychoanalysis to provide new conceptual tools to articulate and provide a deeper understanding of contemporary social problems that otherwise seem baffling, incomprehensible, and because of that, resisting resolution or improvement.

By developing conceptions such as the social unconscious and investigating the effects of societal moralisms, we hope to shed new light on major Australian social issues such as racism, sexism, stereotyping, indigenous recognition, alternative family structures, and religious fundamentalism.

We believe that the best way forward is through open and widely accessible conversations, conducted in ordinary language, free from technical terminology. We provide a platform for discussion that is uniquely inclusive, where psychoanalysts from various schools meet with academics, public intellectuals, artists and members of the wider community.

(introduction from psycheandsociety.com)

About

The Public Philosophy Network promotes philosophy that engages issues of public concern and works collaboratively with civic and professional communities.

OUR MISSION

• to support philosophers who use their concepts and skills to serve communities outside of academia and to make positive changes in society

• to reflect on how philosophy is transformed by various types of public engagement

• to support institutional changes supportive of publicly engaged work

(introduction from publicphilosophynetwork.net)

“Like Plato’s Academy, the majority of modern universities should be civic institutions that engage with, learn from, and enhance the well-being of their local communities…. Each philosophy department should contain at least one member engaged in public interaction.”

The following guest post*  is by Angie Hobbs, Professor of the Public Understanding of Philosophy at  at the University of Sheffield. She is the author of Plato and the Hero and Plato’s Republic: a Ladybird Expert Book (Amazon). You can follow her on Twitter at @drangiehobbs.

This post is the third installment in the “Philosophy of Popular Philosophy” series, edited by Aaron James Wendland, a philosopher at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow.

(introduction from dailynous.com)

Abstract

In recent decades, non-representational approaches to mental phenomena and cognition have been gaining traction in cognitive science and philosophy of mind. In these alternative approach, mental representations either lose their central status or, in its most radical form, are banned completely. While there is growing agreement that non-representational accounts may succeed in explaining some cognitive capacities (e.g. perception), there is widespread skepticism about the possibility of giving non-representational accounts of cognitive capacities such as memory, imagination or abstract thought. In this paper, I will critically examine the view that there are fundamental limitations to non-representational explanations of cognition. Rather than challenging these arguments on general grounds, I will examine a set of human cognitive capacities that are generally thought to fall outside the scope of non-representational accounts, i.e. numerical cognition. After criticizing standard representational accounts of numerical cognition for their lack of explanatory power, I will argue that a non-representational approach that is inspired by radical enactivism offers the best hope for developing a genuine naturalistic explanatory account for these cognitive capacities.

What is Deviant Philosophy?

We have no precise definition of what constitutes “deviant philosophy” and indeed the site is premised on the idea of openness to discovering new philosophical territories and domains.  Our governing conviction is that philosophy itself profits from curiosity about materials and approaches outside what is called the “mainstream.”  Just as “mainstream philosophy” is invoked loosely to denote that which is most familiar, most often taught, and most well-represented in the formal institutional structures of the discipline, we use “deviant philosophy” loosely to capture what this leaves out.  This includes philosophies developed outside the intellectual lineage of the western canon, philosophies from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and indigenous populations.  It includes philosophical perspectives occluded by this canon and its contemporary inheritors, such as those found in feminist philosophy, philosophies of disability, or African American philosophy.  And it includes approaches to this canon that fall outside the ordinary, approaches that take a “non-mainstream” approach to the familiar stuff of the mainstream.  Put most plainly, we use “deviant philosophy” to capture philosophies and philosophical approaches that many philosophers may have missed out on in their early training, don’t find regularly available in the usual discussions and professional outlets, or simply find difficult to begin investigating on their own given limited time and exposure.

It bears noting, perhaps, that our use of the term “deviant” is deliberately playful and tongue-in-cheek.  With it, we intend no fixed or hardened division between types of philosophy, much less to pitch the deviant antagonistically against the mainstream.  Rather, we think that philosophy itself, at its best, is a rather deviant endeavor, one that can entail heady intellectual exploration into the unknown and unfamiliar.  Our site is an effort to plot out some of the less well-traveled directions this sort of exploration might take.  Whether you’re a traditionally trained Anglophone philosopher or work in one of the “deviant” areas and want to explore others, we hope you’ll find much that is philosophically enlivening and pedagogically useful on our site!

(introduction from thedeviantphilosopher.org)

Abstract

New and radically reformative thinking about the enactive and embodied basis of cognition holds out the promise of moving forward age-old debates about whether we learn and how we learn. The radical enactive, embodied view of cognition (REC) poses a direct, and unmitigated, challenge to the trademark assumptions of traditional cognitivist theories of mind—those that characterize cognition as always and everywhere grounded in the manipulation of contentful representations of some kind. REC has had some success in understanding how sports skills and expertise are acquired. But, REC approaches appear to encounter a natural obstacle when it comes to understanding skill acquisition in knowledge-rich, conceptually based domains like the hard sciences and mathematics. This paper offers a proof of concept that REC’s reach can be usefully extended into the domain of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning, especially when it comes to understanding the deep roots of such learning. In making this case, this paper has five main parts. The section “Ancient Intellectualism and the REC Challenge” briefly introduces REC and situates it with respect to rival views about the cognitive basis of learning. The “Learning REConceived: from Sports to STEM?” section outlines the substantive contribution REC makes to understanding skill acquisition in the domain of sports and identifies reasons for doubting that it will be possible to apply the same approach to knowledge-rich STEM domains. The “Mathematics as Embodied Practice” section gives the general layout for how to understand mathematics as an embodied practice. The section “The Importance of Attentional Anchors” introduces the concept “attentional anchor” and establishes why attentional anchors are important to educational design in STEM domains like mathematics. Finally, drawing on some exciting new empirical studies, the section “Seeing Attentional Anchors” demonstrates how REC can contribute to understanding the roots of STEM learning and inform its learning design, focusing on the case of mathematics.

Executive Summary

In fall 2019 the American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ Humanities Indicators project, with funding from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, administered the first nationally representative survey dedicated to understanding Americans’ engagement with and attitudes toward the humanities. The survey asked 5,015 American adults, age 18 and above (in a sample drawn from NORC at the University of Chicago’s AmeriSpeak panel) about their engagement in a variety of humanistic activities, as well as their beliefs about the personal, societal, and economic benefits of the humanities.

For the purposes of this study, the term humanities encompassed more than the academic disciplines associated with the field. The survey included questions about a wide array of activities in which Americans engage as part of their personal and work lives, such as: early childhood reading; K–12 and higher education in humanities subjects; later-in-life engagement with the humanities through books, the internet, television, and cultural institutions; and descriptive writing on the job.

Exploratory work revealed that the public had diverse conceptions of the term humanities. To overcome this lack of a common understanding, the survey first asked about the what and where of humanities activities (such as reading at home, thinking about an ethical choice, or visiting a history museum) without employing the term humanities. The term was then concretized for respondents by pointing them back to the earlier practices and also providing a definition rooted in some of the field’s better-known disciplines (“studying or participating in activities related to literature, languages, history, and philosophy”). Only then were respondents asked about their opinions of the field.

The survey revealed that a substantial majority of Americans believes the humanities confer personal, societal, and economic benefits. The study also found considerable engagement in a range of humanities activities at home and in the workplace, as well as strong support for teaching humanities subjects in the schools. The survey also found relatively little agreement with a variety of negative statements about the field, such as “cost[s] too much” or is “a waste of time.”

The survey offers four broad insights:

• There is substantial engagement with the humanities in American life. However, very few people engage regularly in the full range of activities, or even in all the activities associated with a given discipline (e.g., someone who watches history shows is not very likely to also research history topics online).

• Though Americans hold a generally favorable view of the humanities, especially as an area of education, their enthusiasm is relatively attenuated in comparison to other intellectual fields and even to some of the humanities’ component disciplines (especially history).

• Many Americans do not recall being exposed to the humanities by their parents, and most adults wished they had taken more humanities courses in school.

• And finally, a substantial share of Americans has been hampered at work due to a deficiency in one or more humanities skills, though the survey also reveals that many Americans do not think they need humanities skills in the workplace.

The results of the study enlarge the framework for thinking about the meaning of the public humanities, suggesting where and how the public engages with the humanities in their lives, what views they actually hold about the field, where and when they believe the humanities should be taught to young people, and finally, how Americans use humanities skills in the workplace, a topic that looms ever-larger in conversations about humanities majors and the future of the field.

(summary from amacad.org)

About

The Logic Supergroup is an alliance of logicians in quarantine. It comprises logic groups across the world, hosting virtual talks by speakers that these groups would have had in their physical seminars/colloquia, had it not been for the global pandemic. Topics include philosophical logic, mathematical logic, and the use of logic and formal methods in linguistics, computer science, cognitive science, and other areas.

The upcoming presentations are detailed in the calendar below, which you can navigate to find the abstracts of past and future talks as well. You can find out about the participating groups' scheduled talks in the Participating groups page.

(about from The Logic Supergroup)

A project by Quanta Magazine. Text by Kevin Hartnett.
Design and visualizations by Kim Albrecht and Jonas Parnow.

Here is a map of mathematics as it stands today, mathematics as it is practiced by mathematicians.

From simple starting points — Numbers, Shapes, Change — the map branches out into interwoven tendrils of thought. Follow it, and you’ll understand how prime numbers connect to geometry, how symmetries give a handle on questions of infinity.

And although the map is necessarily incomplete — mathematics is too grand to fit into any single map — we hope to give you a flavor for the major questions and controversies that animate the field, as well as the conceptual tools needed to dive in.

There’s no right or wrong way to explore. You can go in a straight line from topic to topic, or jump around, searching for something that catches your eye.

If mathematics is the poetry of logical ideas, as Albert Einstein once wrote, then through this we hope to provide an appreciation for all the beauty that it describes.

(introduction from quantamagazine.org)

Abstract

Although many agree that all teaching rests on a theory of knowledge, there has been no in-depth exploration of the implications of the philosophy of mathematics for education. This is Paul Ernest's aim. Building on the work of Lakatos and Wittgenstein it challenges the prevalent notion that mathematical knowledge is certain, absolute and neutral, and offers instead an account of mathematics as a social construction. This has profound educational implications for social issues, including gender, race and multiculturalism; for pedagogy, including investigations and problem solving; and challenges hierarchical views of mathematics, learning and ability. Beyond this, the book offers a well-grounded model of five educational ideologies, each with its own epistemology, values, aims and social group of adherents. An analysis of the impact of these groups on the National Curriculum results in a powerful critique, revealing the questionable assumptions, values and interests upon which it rests. The book finishes on an optimistic note, arguing that pedagogy, left unspecified by the National Curriculum, is the way to achieve the radical aims of educating confident problem posers and solvers who are able to critically evaluate the social uses of mathematics.

On August 25, high school student Gracie Cunningham posted a video to TikTok that led to her accidentally going viral as the “Math Isn’t Real” Girl. In that first video, the teen says that she doesn’t think math is real and asks questions such as “Who came up with this concept?” and “How would you start on the concept of algebra?” The discussion lasts a little more than one minute and happens while Cunningham is doing her makeup before work. (Photo credit: Chris Liverani/Unsplash; Gracie Cunningham/Twitter)

(introduction from ams.org)

Abstract

In this introduction we discuss the motivation behind the workshop “Towards a New Epistemology of Mathematics” of which this special issue constitutes the proceedings. We elaborate on historical and empirical aspects of the desired new epistemology, connect it to the public image of mathematics, and give a summary and an introduction to the contributions to this issue.

Abstract

Providing insight into the background, theory and practical applications of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), Transforming Higher Education through Universal Design for Learning: An International Perspective examines and shares best practice in UDL implementation worldwide to provide strategies for strengthening student accessibility, engagement and learning outcomes through the development of flexible learning environments.

Drawing upon insightful, research-based contributions from educators and student service specialists in Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Israel, Norway, South Africa, Spain, the UK and all across the USA, this book:

• considers diversity in the form of disability, minority ethnic groups, gender identities, first generation university students and varying socio-economic backgrounds;

• brings together key thinkers and actors in the field of UDL and expertly maps its practices to the higher educational domain;

• explores the multiple means of representation, expression and engagement that combine to create a successful UDL framework.

Each chapter not only provides a different perspective of how UDL has helped meet the needs of all students to ensure that education is accessible, culturally responsive and socially just, but also considers how this can then be implemented into higher education environments the world over. This book is a crucial read for those who want to make a positive difference in higher education provision and outcomes.

Abstract

This book describes and defines inclusive research, outlining how to recognize it, understand it, do it, and know when it is done well. In doing so it will address the areas of overlap and distinctiveness in relation to participatory, emancipatory, user-led and partnership research as well as exploring the various practices encompassed within each of these inclusive approaches.

The book will focus on how and why more inclusive approaches to research have evolved. It will position inclusive research within the key debates and shifts in policy, define key ideas and terms, disuss the contested nature of inclusive research and illustrate a range of approaches using examplars. The aim is to discuss the range of challenges involved and to examine the degree to which these challenges have so far been met.

What is “public philosophy”? I am not convinced that there is any such thing. I recognize the differences between good philosophy and bad philosophy, historical philosophy and contemporary philosophy, and philosophy of math and philosophy of mind. But I am skeptical that there is any meaningful, much less necessary, difference in kind between philosophy that happens to be printed in a newspaper and philosophy that finds itself cloistered in an academic journal. Both strike me as “just philosophy.”

(introduction from oxfordpublicphilosophy.com)

This book is about mathematical ideas, about what mathematics means-and why. Abstract ideas, for the most part, arise via conceptual metaphor-metaphorical ideas projecting from the way we function in the everyday physical world. Where Mathematics Comes From argues that conceptual metaphor plays a central role in mathematical ideas within the cognitive unconscious-from arithmetic and algebra to sets and logic to infinity in all of its forms.

(summary from basicbooks.com)

Gracie's follow-up video where she responded to the criticism and support she had received:

1. How did people know what they were looking for when they started theorising about formulas because I wouldn't know what to look for? 

2. Once they did find these formulas, how did they know that they were right? 

3. Why is everyone being really mean to me on twitter? 

4. Why did a physicist who's followed by Barack Obama retweet me? 

5. Is this number 5? I can't count. 

6. Is anyone gonna post this on twitter? 

7. Why are the only people who are disagreeing with me the ones who are dumb, and the physicists and mathematicians are agreeing with me?