{"id":904,"date":"2015-02-03T19:11:35","date_gmt":"2015-02-04T01:11:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/?p=904"},"modified":"2015-02-06T12:56:51","modified_gmt":"2015-02-06T18:56:51","slug":"math-and-the-genius-myth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/2015\/02\/03\/math-and-the-genius-myth\/","title":{"rendered":"Math and the Genius Myth"},"content":{"rendered":"

Earlier this month, Science<\/i> published a paper about the genius myth and gender<\/a>. It found that when academics in a field think their discipline requires a special innate talent, that field tends to attract fewer women.\u00a0\u201cWe\u2019re not saying women [or African-Americans] aren\u2019t brilliant or can\u2019t succeed in a field that requires brilliance,\u201d one of the authors told Science News<\/a>. \u201cIt\u2019s the culture of the field that undermines representation because of stereotypes.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Where<\/a>

Where do you need to be to be a mathematician? Image: Mwtoews, via Wikimedia Commons.<\/p><\/div>\n

Bethany Brookshire, who wrote the Science News article,\u00a0shared some more\u00a0personal\u00a0thoughts about it on her blog<\/a>. She writes that we tend to attribute men\u2019s success to their talent and women\u2019s to their hard work. When combined with the perception that innate talent is necessary, and perhaps sufficient, for success in certain fields, this idea\u00a0reinforces the stereotype that women are more suited for some\u00a0fields than others.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s no surprise that mathematics is one of the fields where the genius myth is most pervasive. Mathematicians used to actively cultivate the idea of mathematics as a hallowed priesthood to which only a few are called. Paul Halmos wrote<\/a>, \u201cTo be a scholar of mathematics you must be born with talent, insight, concentration, taste, luck, drive and the ability to visualize and guess.\u201d As I read through that sentence, the idea that our innate mathematical talent is crucial feels sillier and sillier. Are any of us born with insight? Concentration? Taste? We might be born with some amount of aptitude for those things, but we cultivate them over time in response to what our family, friends, and society say is valuable. Why do we think mathematical ability is different?<\/p>\n

Cathy O\u2019Neil says<\/a> that the Science<\/i> study resonates with her personal experiences. She writes,<\/p>\n

It\u2019s just one study, and the response rate was small, so the word is not final. Even so, I think this proves that we should look into this more, gather more evidence, and see where it leads.<\/p>\n

Personally, I have already spent quite a bit of time trying to deal with this very problem in mathematics. For example, I\u2019ve explained before how I deliberately teach kids an introduction to proof that emphasizes practice over the silly and distracting concept of having an innate gift<\/a>. It works, and it\u2019s more fun too, for both men and women.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

One of the common arguments about men\u2019s and women\u2019s aptitudes in mathematics is that while the mean and median of mathematical ability, and many other traits, may be the same for men and women, there are more men who are outliers in both directions. Therefore jobs that require outstanding work\u2014such as tenured mathematics professor at a top university\u2014go disproportionately to men. Izabella Laba<\/a> is blunt\u00a0in her assessment of that position<\/a>.<\/p>\n

From my professional point of view as a mathematician, here\u2019s how I see this argument. Take a fluid, complex, multidimensional quality such as “math skills.” (Or such as “propensity for criminality,” for that matter.) Assume that this quality can be uniquely quantified, on some scale that covers all types and ranges of \u201cmath ability.\u201d Assume further that the resulting distribution is described by a bell curve, because why not. Condition on events of probability practically zero, assume that the same generic, first-approximation model is still accurate on a scale and in a range where it was never meant to be applied, and draw your conclusions about women faculty at R1 universities.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Furthermore, the problem is even deeper than the bell curve outlier idea:<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve lived for centuries in a culture that has discouraged women from focused achievement\u2013and by “discouraged” I mean “actively prevented”\u2013directing them towards unassuming mediocrity instead. We\u2019ve lived in a culture that has propagated the stereotype of a woman as an all-round dilettante, while encouraging men possessed of any discernible talent to pursue it to distinction.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The perception that math success is based on innate talent\u00a0is hard to eradicate, but I am encouraged that today, people like O’Neil and Terry Tao emphasize the importance of hard work<\/a>\u00a0and enjoyment<\/a> over native intelligence to making progress in mathematics. I hope that\u00a0by changing our emphasis, we can encourage a more diverse group of future mathematicians to excel.<\/p>\n

Update: I wrote about the media’s role in the genius myth at Roots of Unity<\/a>, my Scientific American blog.<\/p>\n

<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Earlier this month, Science published a paper about the genius myth and gender. It found that when academics in a field think their discipline requires a special innate talent, that field tends to attract fewer women.\u00a0\u201cWe\u2019re not saying women [or … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":61,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[86,29],"tags":[365,163,361,360,362,363,37],"class_list":["post-904","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-people-in-math","category-women-in-math","tag-bethany-brookshire","tag-cathy-oneil","tag-genius","tag-genius-myth","tag-innate-talent","tag-izabella-laba","tag-women-in-science"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3tW3N-eA","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/904","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/61"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=904"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/904\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":944,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/904\/revisions\/944"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=904"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=904"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/blogonmathblogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=904"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}