Skip to main content

Ben Orlin - Five Way Interview

Ben Orlin loves math and cannot draw. He is the author of several bestselling books: Math with Bad Drawings (2018), the calculus storybook Change is the Only Constant (2019) and the infamously large Math Games with Bad Drawings (2022). He has taught every level of mathematics from 6th grade to undergraduate, and his work has appeared in The Atlantic, The Los Angeles Times, and Popular Science. His latest book is Math for English Majors.

Why math(s)?

My first passion is how people think. (Before I was a math major, I was a psych major!) So I view math, and especially math education, as a magnificent case study in applied psychology.

How do we braid together intuition and logic? How do we move from concrete details to abstract truths? What makes us build identities as 'a math person' or 'not a math person'? Every student I've ever taught had their own irreducible, irreproducible way of thinking about math. Nothing excites me more than learning how students think.

Why this book?

When I talk to mathematicians, they all downplay mathematical language. 'It's about the ideas,' they say, 'not the symbols.' Which is true enough!

But when I talk to writers, they love language. They've got favorite words, accents, etymologies, regional idioms... for them, the language is the raw material of literature, and it's fun to play with.

I wanted to bring that linguistic curiosity to math. Too often, the rules of our language remain invisible -- unspeakably obvious to experts, but unimaginably foreign to novices. This book is aiming to help both experts and novices see the language with new eyes.

Do you think if we were to redesign the language of mathematics from scratch, rather than the piecemeal form it now takes, it would be very different (and if so, how)?

Ooh, that's like pondering how evolution might unfold on an alien planet. The possibilities must be vast, but my imagination falters!

Maybe, freed from the strictures of typesetting, we'd design something more two-dimensional, like the triangle of power (which unifies logs, roots, and exponents) or the alien symbols in Arrival. Or maybe, because we perceive colors so vividly, we'd use them to carry meanings, like in Oliver Byrne's illustrated version of Euclid.

Still, I can only see mathematics through the window of our language. I struggle to envision what it'd look like from another vantage point!

What’s next?

This is my fourth book, and I'm excited to keep writing them. Several ideas are in competition for the next one:

1. A collection of the finest brain teasers that ever teased brains

2. A pilgrimage in search of mathematical beauty

3. True folktales of heroic calculations

4. Life wisdom from a probability-obsessed father (specifically, my father)

I invite readers to weigh in on the options! I am so suggestible and easily swayed that with sufficient pestering and flattery you can probably get me to write a book of your choice.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

My eldest is starting kindergarten; my youngest is starting to say her sister's name; I'm designing a new class on financial and civic mathematics; and less than 24 hours after typing these words, I'll be at the Minnesota State Fair eating grilled corn. In short: exciting times!

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Interview by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more