I think YES. One announcer (sha) said on the air that she did not understand why tangents were studied at school. She's smart? So she doesn't know anything. And now - psychologists, political scientists, bloggers are illiterate - these are those who are not strong in mathematics ...
Those who do not understand mathematics do not understand logic either. Therefore, he can only engage in "boltology", that is, humanitarianism, which is not capable of a result. What we are now seeing. "Pluralism of opinions" has led to a mess, because no one performs the synthesis of them - for this you need to understand the logic.
If there are problems in the school curriculum, then most likely he is just lazy and restless. There is nothing there that would require increased wiggling.
No, because with the quality of teaching, which is now, textbooks like Peterson, when they say that you can add circles with squares, it is surprising that smart people appear.
Next, "stupid" because they don't need it. Future artists for example (or janitors). If a person wants to study, and there is good teaching, but he does not succeed, then one could say that the person is stupid. This is less than 5% of all cases.
The question is not entirely correct, for a start, mathematics is different, take, for example, math analysis there requires clear knowledge and formulas are often used by scientists, now take the algebra of logic this subject is called differently by everyone, therefore I will call it so, these are mainly problems on the probability and logic of finding connections is what they say a person has from nature, in the first case, knowledge is needed to solve the problems already set tasks, in the second there is more logic and abstractions, a lot of things are forgotten about abstract thinking, that is, without this, the mathematician is essentially the language of which you can’t apply in practice and you don’t understand how to apply it, but imagination flows out of abstractions without it, especially in logic and geometries, from here follows this creativity, this can be proved by working in physics engines with 3d graphics without imagination and there is nothing to do there, and I would say one of the main aspects is quick wits, that is, to be able to figure out that situation or that task to which one needs to be solved not so that you were given the text and told to decide according to these formulas, namely to understand for yourself when and at what moment to apply this or that experiment, and in general, without mathematics, even the humanities cannot exist, they are all subject to their law of logic and their correlations , so in fact, if you do not see connections, then you are stupid, because mathematics is not only a set of rules and axioms, this is the essence of everything, it explains how to learn another on the basis of one task, see the general principles of object connections, and so on, but there is one thing, but people who are good at school mathematics and math analysis do not always think well logically; there was a test that shows that schoolchildren who know mathematics perfectly well understand the theory of probability better than those who do not know it, they still have not found an explanation.
it all depends on who taught you and how much you yourself studied, was interested. the world is organized according to the laws most similar to mathematical ones, so you need to know mathematics. but is there mathematics taught? mathematics must be felt, it must be approached by pure logic without knowledge of formulas and cramming. I have a lot of publics about mathematics. but one suitable one remembered that you are almost asking - https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5f25162f3049931c50417c8f/chto-pokazyvaet-iq-5f322965bce05859248d9fd4
It all depends on who taught you and how much you yourself studied, was interested. the world is organized according to the laws most similar to mathematical ones, so you need to know mathematics. but is there mathematics taught? mathematics must be felt, it must be approached by pure logic without knowledge of formulas and cramming. I have a lot of publications about mathematics. but here is one more appropriate - you are almost asking about it - a quote from there "Smart people made an attempt to digitize the amount of intelligence, creating the now well-known IQ test for everyone.
Well - not bad, but we'll still go through the pluses and the disadvantages of this test, since many of us consider IQ to be an unconditional indicator that should be developed to the maximum. This is a too linear approach to the problem. First of all, I propose to understand - what is the actual development.
You guessed correctly that before all you need to understand is what we are developing, what we have in general.And if you have a normal IQ, you will easily understand that a person is not only a mind, but also, for example, feelings, actions, body.Your I is not limited only by the mind. Therefore, even the smartest person is not able to digitize all life tasks, but they still have to be solved, and this happens largely not only thanks to intelligence, but also in spite of it.
Then it is obvious that development, for example, is so that intelligence is at the x level, feelings at level y, and actions at level z, and not just going off scale somewhere into infinity. Development is balancing, setting all your parameters to the optimum. And this optimum is the goal - UO, IO, SZSN, SO and other magical abbreviations.
Balance is balance, so just becoming smarter and that's it - this is not enough, it can do harm. It is well known that a large proportion of people with high intelligence are autistic. And it's like a disease. We all have a limit and almost the same amount of energy, so it must be distributed proportionally to EVERYTHING. Any bias makes you untenable. A smart guy may not be adequate to the requirements of the world - for example, in communication with people, which makes up 90% of all life. He can be disgusting as a person, not being able to behave correctly in critical situations, protecting himself from someone. All why? He kind of used all his energy for one thing. Here's an example - I bought myself a house of 400 square meters and there is no more money either for furnishings, or for the maintenance of the house, or for a communal apartment. An unviable creature that is doomed to perform in a rural circus, multiplying numbers and doing numerical tricks. It's one thing if nature made you that way, and it's another to strive for it. It is known from experience that 60% of the effort gives 90% of the effectiveness, and the remaining 10% requires 40% of the effort. If your IQ is "normal", then you will understand that the first efforts pay off 1.5 times, and the second - only 0.25, that is, they are 4 times unprofitable. The effectiveness of efforts to achieve efficiency falls 6 times! So maybe it's in fig? If IQ allows you to understand that perfectionism is also a disease, then it is sufficient.
Why would you be healthystrive to become sick? And in general - what then should we strive for? Let's see a row:
These are the levels of development of the mind. "I hope your question has been answered, and if not, the full publication is here https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5f25162f3049931c50417c8f/chto-pokazyvaet-iq- 5f322965bce05859248d9fd4
A.S. Pushkin is known as an intelligent person with weak mathematical abilities. Moreover, logical thinking is quite developed, not a single inaccuracy has been found in his creative heritage.
Not everyone can have an analytical mindset. And this does not mean that people are stupid. By the way, mathematicians may have absolutely no inclination for languages, I met this in my student years.
Mathematics is both a litmus test and a brain trainer. It does not make anyone "smart", it teaches thinking. She trains the same muscles that work when you need to think about something. "If I say this, they will answer me then, then I will answer like this. And if there is Sergey, then it is better not to start this conversation. Then how to get information indirectly?"
Our world is built on mathematics, mathematics permeates literally all areas of life, therefore it is certainly necessary to understand it, at least at the everyday level. And it is not necessary for everyone to be very smart, sometimes it is easier to live stupid.
Vlad O. answered half the question well. On the second, in short - nonsense
Every NORMAL who is not zatyukanny has something to brag ALWAYS! Limit?! Nick Muromsky 80 years old
Surprisingly, all representatives of flora and fauna have no mind: animals, plants. And there are no problems, and no inconsistencies: none of the animals commits suicide. Question: are we not overestimating the importance of the mind ..?!
This does not mean anything at all. Maybe a person is not trying to learn mathematics, he is not interested in it. Maybe I convinced myself that mathematics is "not his", etc.
The mind has a classification: analytical, social, aesthetic, production (craft). Stupidity is the inability to think independently and make rational decisions. The analytical mind is responsible for this ability. If it is not, then you are stupid.
In fact, IQ has questions not only in mathematics, but also in linguistics .. And this is not accidental. The ability for languages is in some way even more accurate criterion for determining the level of intelligence. A person with a hypertrophied left hemisphere may turn out to be ill-adapted to life (remember - V. Nabokov's Luzhin, or the protagonist of Mind Games). The "Rain Man" hero with genius in mathematics is generally an idiot. But linguistics requires the work of both the left (grammar) and the right (listening) hemispheres. Plus an enormous memory load. So no: math ability and intelligence are not exactly identical. This is just one facet of intelligence. In everyday life, the "lowest" of the facets of intelligence, a banal trick, may be more useful. This is exactly what the vulgar phrase "If you are so smart, why are you so poor"?
It would be nice to define the term "stupid" for a start. If by it we mean the inability to solve logical problems, then yes - a stupid person in mathematics is stupid in general, because the science of logic is part of mathematics. But such a definition is not the only possible one. You can define stupidity as an inability to succeed, for example, or an inability to communicate. And then the statement "stupid in mathematics - stupid in general" ceases to be true. After all, both success and communication skills are not directly determined by aptitude for mathematics.
Math can sometimes make smart people stupid. That doesn't mean it's silly not to be good at math. Mathematics is a very abstract and complex discipline that requires many years (even decades) of study, and there are many smart people who understand it little and are unable to use it.
The danger of mathematical arguments is that a person can sometimes follow an absurd path of reasoning without being warned about its absurdity, due to the fact that his mind is so lost in mathematical reasoning algorithms that his common sense is not can get to the point.
One of the main difficulties for people who study deeply mathematics is that they can be confused by the mathematical mechanism they use, to the detriment of their ability to reason well. about the nature of the problem that mathematics is designed to describe.
Unlike such people, people who do not reason in terms of mathematical dogmas (with a non-mathematical mindset, who are called stupid in mathematics) are capable of being creative thinking, which is characterized by the absence of rules and any restrictions.
If you are not savvy and ignorant in a certain science, even if in the queen of sciences, this is not a reason to put on the stigma of stupidity. You have been given a school curriculum, including in order to decide in life and choose what you like best. Don't confuse education with intelligence. There are tons of educated idiots.
It seems to me that matan is just one of the areas of application of logical thinking and abstraction. So making far-reaching conclusions in one area is a dubious idea. For example, I love matan, but I hate statistics. I find it fucking boring. Although it would seem ... By the way, there is a lot of mathematics in poetry and music, someone mentioned Pushkin here, the very phrase "poetic size" speaks ...
I didn’t like mathematics at school, so I got a C. But Russian-literature was my favorite subjects, essays were almost always 5. But at the university higher mathematics, strength of materials somehow very easily went, the whole group solved problems. I was surprised myself - what was wrong with me. I passed everything perfectly. So all these statements are not an indicator of intelligence.
Ability for mathematics is the ability to think logically, i.e. find a link between things and events, on the basis of which to determine intermediate unknown facts, predict, make interdependent decisions. If this is not given, then you can be guided by experience, i.e. standard. what is available to everyone within his competence.
Thus, a stupid in mathematics can only make standard decisions and is inferior to his counterpart in making new non-standard decisions, in principle not stupid, but limited.
Mathematics is a strict formalized written language of abbreviations. It turns out that there is a category of people who are not able to learn this language. In general, I noticed that all mathematicians are capable of mastering the humanities, but the humanities can rarely master mathematics. Do not recognize strictness and consistency?)
Of course not. In general, the concept of a stupid relative. Perhaps a person is considered like this in mathematics because he did not make an effort to study this science. Scientists have long proven that any skills and abilities can be developed, including mathematical ones. Believe me, if a person begins to regularly solve complex mathematical problems, by the end he will come to a good result: they will be given to him easily.
The situation when a person does not know how to solve seemingly easy problems for others does not mean that he is stupid. He just did not try to solve them, to study ways of solving these problems. But the same person can understand other areas, which confirms his mind.
It is impossible to divide humanity into stupid and smart. Everyone is considered a professional in a particular case
Many here say that everyone has the ability for any field of activity, this is true. And many are sure that not mastering the school curriculum is laziness. Yes, in a certain percentage, BUT you have been at school for a long time and have forgotten teachers who can simply stop any desire to develop in one direction or another? it turns out, but you don't. And absolutely not every child can survive this and endure some kind of plus. So, before accusing people of laziness, look at the education system, which not only does not match the time, but also cannot provide quality education. And about self-development, you may not even start, at school, of course, everyone wanted to stick to textbooks, first in mathematics, then in algebra, etc. And this, by the way, applies to all subjects.
if you don’t know mathematics, then it was unnecessary or not interesting. its OK. you cannot call a person stupid who has not even tried to figure it out and therefore does not understand anything.
but the situation is different, if you want to understand, they diligently explain the same thing to you many times, while the teacher communicates correctly, but you still can't get through, this may already be a sign. it doesn't just work with math. theoretically, an intelligent person is able to understand everything with the proper approach
(In my opinion) If you don't understand biology, geography, literature, chemistry, foreign languages, etc. - you're not stupid. If you do not understand physics, algebra, geometry, then you are stupid, since these disciplines are logical and accurate. From my own experience, I can say that this has been proven more than once.
I don't think so. I remember, let them say, where people on the streets were asked questions like "in what year was Pushkin born?" Few were responsible and for that they were called stupid. What if there was an excellent physicist among them? What if a great artist or composer? And that's why I think that you shouldn't consider yourself stupid if you don't know mathematics.
I know several very smart people, mathematicians and physicists. But ... in all other respects, and in life, they are stupid.
I know people who are very smart even without mathematics and other things. And vice versa.
I don't think it is related.
In this case, one should not confuse the lack of knowledge and the wrong approach to learning with a complete lack of understanding of the fundamental laws of mathematics. If you do not know what the sine and cosine functions are and sit down to solve the trigonometric equation, it is not surprising that you it will be difficult to solve it. In schools, they usually explain mathematics very poorly and superficially. They only tell some schemes for solving problems. It's like if you came to learn a foreign language and instead of telling the alphabet, they start talking to you right away in this language. Of course, there are cases when people do not understand elementary mathematics, even if the material is explained to them in great detail and well, at the same time in different ways. I think that in this case such people are really stupid and not only in math.
Lack of ability in certain disciplines and sciences, the so-called technical and humanitarian mindset - common misconceptions.
Initially, we all have a basic set of inclinations due to physiological capabilities. The psyche, consciousness and abilities develop in the process of human interaction with the social environment surrounding him: we are raised by our parents, we learn to interact with objects and people, go to school and clubs, participate in various projects, learn languages, and so on.
Thus, in order to develop certain abilities in oneself, it is necessary to create conditions:
If you consider yourself stupid in mathematics, because you have never been fond of this science, it is new and unknown to you, then the very process of studying it is a good training for the brain. Learning is based on the phenomenon of neuroplasticity - the ability of the brain to develop, learning and learning something new. Any training is the creation of new neural connections, namely, the performance of the brain depends on their quantity and quality.
So discover new things, learn and constantly train your brain to be equally well versed in different issues.
Well, I don’t know, the mathematics teacher drummed into us in grades 5 to 8 that we were stupid and would not achieve anything without mathematics. Glory to the CPSU that it has changed. But all the same, I remember these lessons with disgust. But I was versed in social studies and knew more for philosophers than a teacher, so no, not stupid, you're just good in another area.
The point is that the priority of mathematical sciences in the modern world is obvious. Numbers are much more important than colors and speech patterns. In the Middle Ages, the possession of a sword and a dagger was just as important. Everything is relative. Two translators will be able to agree on anything, two multilingual engineers will immediately reduce the level of their communication to the Stone Age. Mathematics is not the most important thing in life. Don't worry about it.
Any person is capable of mathematics. You won't get a chance to get interested in it unless you make an effort to understand the pattern of its work. I recommend the book "Think Like a Mathematician". Be more attentive, otherwise you will download, oh, I mean buy)), the trial version, which is several times shorter than the original.
I would say that everything is not easy. I think that here we need to talk about intelligence, about success in mathematics, and how all this is connected.
Research on intelligence began in the 19th century in the works of Francis Galton (Charles Darwin's cousin). Galton drew attention to the fact that talented and successful parents often have talented and successful children. Having collected a fairly large array of observations, he came to the conclusion that intellectual qualities are inherited. For that time, this was a new idea, since other views prevailed. It was believed that everything depends on education. Galton also created positive eugenics. At his suggestion, it was necessary to create conditions for talented, successful, beautiful people to marry each other and give birth to even more talented, successful and beautiful children. Of course, in the 19th century, intelligence was not understood quite the way it is now. It was associated with high sensitivity of perception (sensitivity), good motor coordination.
From 1903-1905, the first tests of intelligence began to appear. This happened in France, in connection with the introduction of universal schooling. The task was to divide children into school classes. It quickly became clear that the chronological ages of children may not coincide with the ages of mental development. The need arose to create a measurement procedure in order to staff classes with children of approximately the same mental age. Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon solved this applied problem.
In 1912, psychologist William Stern proposed an abbreviation known to us - IQ (intelligence quotient). Further, the topic of the study of intelligence becomes extremely popular. Various tests are being created to test intellectual abilities, large-scale studies are being carried out in terms of population coverage.
Since the 1920s, the need for theoretical generalization of the results appears. How do we understand intelligence?
Charles Spearman, an English psychologist and a prominent specialist in the field of mathematical statistics, created a two-factor theory of the development of intelligence. He noted that most often the results of various intellectual tests in humans are interconnected. Those. if memory is good, then the level of erudition is high, and computational ability is good, and verbal intelligence. Using a static procedure of factor analysis, he identified 2 factors of intelligence - G and S. G - generall, the general factor of intelligence, this is about how intellectually developed a person is. S - special, an additional factor, is used in solving certain problems. Those. Spearman concluded that there is some general level of intelligence that is advanced or not. From the standpoint of his theory, if you don’t fumble in mathematics, then most likely yes, you are not very smart in all other respects.
Criticism of Spearman’s works immediately appeared. The results of his research began to be rechecked by various scientists. For example, Thurstone, later Guildford. And each time it turned out that some generalhis intelligence factor did not stand out, there were always many factors. So, the so-called theories of multiple intelligences appeared. It is based on the idea that there are different intelligences. For example, Howard Gardner analyzed ideas about intelligence in different cultures, and found that they are very different. Based on the analysis of these ideas, he identified the following types of intelligence:
logical and mathematical intelligence
naturalistic intelligence As you can see, logical-mathematical is only one of the types of intelligence, far from the only one. You can have poor math skills, but be gifted musically, or work great with lyrics.
Since the 1980s, there has been no consensus in the field of intelligence research on how to understand this intelligence. Moreover, new types of intelligence are beginning to emerge. For example, practical intelligence as the ability to solve practical problems (like where to get money) (R. Sternberg) or emotional intelligence (EQ).
But the insidiousness of the question also lies in the fact that if a person "cannot in mathematics" - this does not mean that he does not have intellectual abilities for this. This can be, for example, mathematical anxiety. This phenomenon is associated with the occurrence of anxiety and nervousness when faced with any mathematical problems (and is not associated with abilities, mainly upbringing and life experience). Perhaps, pedagogical neglect, when a person is far behind the program and has already given up on himself.
So, in general, I would say that about a direct connection between "stupidity" in mathematics and "stupidity" in general, we cannot speak. Everything is much more complicated, and there is not even an absolutely direct connection between mathematical ability and success in mathematics (due to the interference of many factors).
I'll throw in my five cents: if the entire school mathematics course passed by and you consider yourself "dumb in mathematics", think about what kind of teachers you had. It is often said: "the teacher has beaten off interest in literature," but few people say that about mathematics, and it is even easier to discourage interest in it. Therefore, if it seems to you that mathematics is not available to you on the basis of some long-standing knowledge about yourself, try to start over: with the manuals that suit you or with people who can explain it so that it becomes clear to you. And it may well turn out that the matter is not in your mind, but in the fact that you once missed something and could not catch up with the program.
Yes and no. If a person is dumb in mathematics, then he is dumb in mathematics, but in something else he can be smart. For example, I have the opposite situation. I can understand math and interact with technology, but I am dumb at understanding people and their emotions.
So yes, if a person does not understand mathematics, then he is dumb. Just like a person who does not understand art or may get lost in three pines.
In general, I very much support the opinion of Can Robinson.
He says that the current educational system is built for industrialism and the work of professors where mathematics is valued. Actually, according to this system, built in the direction of the mathematical and humanitarian sciences, a person is evaluated.
Yes, mathematics is now a priority. Take the same computer science that works with numbers. But people don't consider the creative side. Imagine our world if everyone was judged by how you dance or draw?)) No matter how funny it sounds, and it would be absurd, to evaluate a person by some one feature. And if a person likes music and does he want to be a drummer? Or a massage therapist? Nobody says that mathematics is not needed at all, but it is not required for everyone and in its entirety.
Better yet, watch the video with Can Robinson about the educational system at the TED conference.
This means that the average person is stupider than the average person who has mastered mathematics. Anyone who knows mathematics, knows how to build causal relationships, analyze, assess the probability, he will be more successful in other intellectual pursuits, including humanitarian.
No. This means that either you were not taught it well, or you were a little lazy studying this subject. Any mentally healthy person has the ability to learn anything, the main desire is: mathematics, foreign languages, singing, sports. The main thing is to find a suitable teaching method. It is likely that not everyone can become a brilliant mathematician, although, probably, this will someday become a myth, but a few months of painstaking studies will solve this problem, and you will begin to enjoy the process. As it was already written above, mathematics is just "logical operations".
Writers, musicians and other people whose profession is not related to mathematics, of course, can do without it, as well as without other natural science disciplines. But, firstly, they are a sad sight when they do their homework with their children, and secondly, they become extremely unprotected against various scammers in the field of science (the same cosmetology, where "the cream rejuvenates at the genetic level") and technology. Not to mention useful chemistry skills like sniffing unknown substances. Well, knowledge of physics prevents the appearance of "oscilloscope arrows" in the literature.
Of course not. If a person does not have the ability in one specific scientific field, this does not mean anything at all - in any other area he can be very capable.
And it is important to understand that "dumb in mathematics" is an extremely relative concept. If someone is not given a specific topic, or does not come out to receive a high mark in mathematics in one particular educational institution, this does not mean that there is no ability for mathematics at all. Maybe I just didn't have to meet with a person who could clearly explain this topic.
So difficulties with mathematics are definitely not a reason to gnaw yourself on the topic of intellectual abilities. Mathematics is not the whole world.
In general, no. I remember my English teacher tirelessly insisted that a good knowledge of mathematics is the key to success in grammar. In my observation, in most cases, this statement is true (at least it was true within my class).
No, no. And again NO. I hated mathematics with all my heart at school, I was taught by tutors and I passed the material. For this reason, my classmates often teased, I am generally a humanist. Later, this did not prevent me from studying for another 8 years in your specialty and get a diploma in economics.
Even if you are not dumb in math, you are still dumb in principle. The lack of mathematics is just a small negative feature. Hang in there ..
Well, first of all, with what fright did you decide that "Dumb" in mathematics, and secondly, why is it needed. I know many people who have achieved outstanding results without mathematics, and in general in life after university and school, most people need to know 5 arithmetic operations: + - * /%. I have not yet met an accountant, cashier, psychologist, philosopher ... who at least once counted the square root on a calculator. + - * /% is more than enough to draw up a balance. Many businessmen have amassed millions of fortunes by owning only these five arithmetic operations.
Talented singers, dancers, composers, writers, poets, artists, philologists, psychologists, philosophers ... a huge number of professions for which knowledge of arithmetic is more than enough (although people themselves may love mathematics). Are you really going to consider them "Dumb" just because they do not extract nth roots, do not take second derivatives, and do not calculate logarithms with integrals.
Most importantly, I do not believe that there are people who cannot understand, master mathematics. There are simply people who are not interested, perhaps the school was unlucky with the teacher, perhaps the parents blinked a little when the child walked under the table. Perhaps in their life there was no person in love with mathematics who would have infected them with his love for mathematics.
Mathematics is the same language as other humanitarian languages, the same language as the language of touch or views, the language of music or painting, as the language of amino acids and DNA., like ... Each language has its own rules and traditions , its own charm and charm.
A person who at the age of 11 came up with the idea that a person's thinking and his native language are connected is already a mathematician. Leibniz was also a mathematician, and you think very similarly to him.
There are a lot of incomprehensible answers. But the answer is pretty simple.
Of course yes! If you are dumb in math, then you are basically dumb.
I understand why there are so many answers, that mathematics does not solve all matters. This is because most people are not good at math. Their logic is not very good, and all they take in life is experience, in learning by cramming.
Every rule has an exception and all deeds, but do not have false hopes, for you are not that exception.
I expect cons from people offended by their own stupidity.
And, and there are still people who are given mathematics, but they forgot it because it is not interesting. So, you do not need to deceive yourself that you are one of them. Be honest with yourself.
I am a complete oak in mathematics, because I like it, however, because of the exam, I had to strain myself and learn everything through myself. Passed at 5, but that doesn't matter. All my school life because of mathematics I was called dumb and so on. But now, everyone comes to me for advice on a wide variety of issues, and each time they say how smart I am, apologizing in every possible way for the past. Math is great, but it’s not an indicator of intelligence.
To my surprise, I discovered that no one emphasized the vagueness of the term "mathematics" in this context. Is it arithmetic, the so-called. higher mathematics, concrete mathematics or even geometry? In this regard, it is impossible to correctly understand the question and build reflections from it.
I have met people who had problems with multiplying small numbers in their minds, but there were no problems with solving geometric problems, by visualizing objects. There were also the opposite cases.
Also, it is worth at least to formalize the term "stupid" with an inverse term, based on this, it is possible to build some judgments.
However, we discard tediousness and assume that the author understands arithmetic, but cannot in the so-called. higher mathematics. Let us also assume that "stupidity" means the inability to understand mathematics.
We make sure that when trying to learn, the following trace was observed. conditions: - adequate teaching methodology; - availability of the necessary basis; - desire / bestowal / active cognition.
If these conditions were met, then we can talk about a certain inability to think mathematically (formally, abstractly, logically, etc.). As we can see, this "diagnosis" has already been put higher and it is not at all something new. I propose to go further and consider the possibility of training this brain function. Unfortunately, my competence in the field of neuroscience (neurophysiology?) is meager and I would like to hear a person rummaging in this matter.
I can just give you an excellent phrase that is popular today. "Being smart and learning well are two completely different things." I do not know algebra well, I confess, but I know more of my peers, because I'm just interested in a lot of things, and it would be at least stupid to call me stupid.
Let me cite the psychotherapist's reference book Drozdov.
the easiest degree of mental underdevelopment. Disorders of cognitive activity in oligophrenics in the degree of debility are expressed in the inability to develop complex concepts and, as a result, in the impossibility of complex generalizations, abstract thinking, or, with a lighter degree of debility, in the limitedness of abstract thinking. In these patients, a concretely descriptive type of thinking prevails, it is difficult for them to grasp the whole situation, most often they grasp only the external side of events. Depending on the degree of debility (mild, moderate or severe), this inability to develop concepts is expressed to varying degrees, however, morons can always be noted violations of abstract thinking. DEBITS CAN LEARN IN SCHOOL, BUT IT IS GREAT FOR THEM TO ASSIST THE MATERIAL. ESPECIALLY DIFFICULT SUBJECT IS A MATHEMATICS FOR THEM.
Not possessing an inquisitive mind, not having their own judgments, these persons usually easily adopt other people's views, sometimes adhering to them with extraordinary inertia. Memorizing various rules, expressions, they use them stereotyped, while sometimes they like to teach others.
Not being capable of subtle analysis and generalizations, those suffering from debility (especially with a mild degree) at the same time can deftly navigate in a normal situation.
I assume that the answer will be "minded", because there will be more similarities, a la "I'm not a moron", be abstract;)
Happiness is not in mathematics, but in logic and in understanding causal relationships, which are trained by that very mathematics. That's the same, if x is equal to five, then ... - this trains the brain to see cause-and-effect relationships in everything. You can live without this skill. And it's not even difficult. But it is precisely those who once mastered school mathematical constructions, now consume the perverted logic of "couch analysts" of all stripes and do not see obvious contradictions in it.
I do not insist that this is objective stupidity. But I myself think people who are so easy to dirtied their brains because of their banal inability to build logical chains correctly are stupid. Even if they write great poetry.
I don't understand mathematics (I only like to build parabolas), physics and chemistry. Because I am a humanist, I like to study languages, other cultures.
But solve this problem. If you can, then you are not dumb at all in mathematics. And if you don't know how to solve quadratic equations, is that how you need it?
Chocolate candies in boxes are sold in the bazaar and supermarket. In the bazaar, such a box costs 170 rubles, and in the supermarket, 185 rubles. But Pony goes to the supermarket on foot, and goes to the market by bus. A one-way bus ticket costs 16 rubles. Therefore, it is not worth going to the market because of one box. What is the smallest number of boxes of chocolates a Pony needs to buy to make a trip to the market more profitable than a trip to the supermarket?
Good question. Anyone who is not versed in mathematics, of course, will answer in the negative. Nobody admits that they are stupid :) And those who understand will be pleased to feel smart. Although in reality there is always someone who understands this better than you. There is always someone smarter. Therefore, it does not matter whether you are stupid or not, the moral qualities of a person are much more important, whether he is kind, whether he helps others.
Even a complete lack of competence in any discipline cannot be a sign of a person's stupidity.
Let techies consider mathematics as one of the main tools for describing abstraction, but in general, arithmetic is enough for every person.
Personally, I treat mathematics as ..... mathematics. No more. In my life I use 0.1% out of 100. And the fact that the multiplication table is enough for me ... it says nothing about a person.
The question perfectly reflects the post-Soviet legacy in the minds of Russians. In America, for example, the question would look like "if you are smart in mathematics, does that mean that you are smart, in principle?" The Russian version is closer to me. Which option is better is a rather personal choice. The truth is out there.
If someone is stupid in mathematics, this can mean that a person cannot abstract enough to see the meaning in mathematical formulas, they scare him, or he does not understand why they are needed and how they work. People have different thinking, different memory, speed, level of abstraction, need for visualization. Because of this, not all sciences are equally easy.
People who say that someone is stupid in general because they do not understand math, just want to assert themselves due to the fact that they understand it.
Why did a person's ability for mathematics begin to determine a person's intelligence?) Of course, this is sheer nonsense. The fact that a person is able to solve mathematical problems well means only that he has good analytical and logical thinking abilities, which is completely unnecessary in professions that do not require knowledge of mathematics. For example, here is an excerpt:
"Arithmetic seemed inaccessible to him, and he often shed bitter tears over the first four rules, especially over division." About whom it is said, do you know? Such memories of her great brother were left by the sister of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.
Pushkin's lyceum friend Ivan Pushchin later recalled that “... all the professors looked with reverence at the growing talent of Pushkin.
In the mathematical class, Kartsov called him to the blackboard and asked him an algebraic problem. Pushkin shifted from foot to foot for a long time and kept writing some formulas in silence.
Kartsov finally asked him: “What happened? What is X equal to? "Pushkin, smiling, answered: zero!
" Good! With you, Pushkin, everything in my class ends in zero. Sit in your seat and write poetry. ”
You may not know the multiplication table, but compose fantastically beautiful stories. However, to compose (and here to draw, sculpt and embroider, and so on) is not the mind. This is creativity.
And what is the mind? Perhaps this is the ability to learn, memorize information and apply the acquired knowledge and skills. Anything. If the mind is developed, it is easy for a person to master at least mathematics, even the device of a car, even quantum physics. With the right presentation.
The teacher plays a huge role and his availability is not pedagogical education, but pedagogical talent. If there is none, no teacher training institution will make a good teacher out of this person. In my class, for example, 2/3 of the biology students up to grade 10 had two and three. As soon as the teacher changed, more than half of the class became excellent students, the new teacher not only taught us biology, but also showed that it is a very interesting science.
My conclusion is that as a talented person he is talented in everything, so a smart person is smart in everything. Mathematics alone can be judged by the mind of a particular person. Exceptions - if you had a bad teacher or you were too lazy to study.
And yes. Sometimes I judge a person's mental abilities according to the multiplication table. If on the question "seven nine" a person freezes for half a minute, and then starts counting on his fingers ... well, that's all, the clinic. We don't need these.
It seems to me that not))) Maybe you are not stupid in mathematics, but you have a bad teacher? sooo much depends on him. Sometimes it's good to just try and listen to someone else explain to you to understand.