0:00:01.446,0:00:07.082
The world is awash[br]with divisive arguments,

0:00:07.082,0:00:10.825
conflict, fake news,

0:00:10.825,0:00:13.281
victimhood,

0:00:13.281,0:00:18.871
exploitation, prejudice,[br]bigotry, blame, shouting,

0:00:18.871,0:00:21.999
and minuscule attention spans.

0:00:23.050,0:00:25.296
It can sometimes seem

0:00:25.296,0:00:28.306
that we are doomed to take sides,

0:00:28.306,0:00:30.700
be stuck in echo chambers,

0:00:30.700,0:00:33.017
and never agree again.

0:00:33.684,0:00:36.751
It can sometimes seem[br]like a race to the bottom,

0:00:36.751,0:00:40.584
where everyone is calling out[br]somebody else's privilege

0:00:40.584,0:00:43.501
and vying to show that they

0:00:43.501,0:00:48.503
are the most hard-done-by person[br]in the conversation.

0:00:49.518,0:00:51.546
How can we make sense

0:00:51.546,0:00:54.306
in a world that doesn't?

0:00:55.930,0:01:00.679
I have a tool for understanding[br]this confusing world of ours,

0:01:00.679,0:01:04.394
a tool that you might not expect:

0:01:04.615,0:01:06.477
abstract mathematics.

0:01:07.530,0:01:10.262
I am a pure mathematician.

0:01:10.262,0:01:14.156
Traditionally, pure maths[br]is like the theory of maths,

0:01:14.156,0:01:19.597
where applied maths is applied[br]to real problems like building bridges

0:01:19.597,0:01:21.062
and flying planes

0:01:21.062,0:01:23.740
and controlling traffic flow.

0:01:24.134,0:01:29.468
But I'm going to talk about a way[br]that pure maths applies directly

0:01:29.468,0:01:32.822
to our a daily lives as a way of thinking.

0:01:33.177,0:01:37.230
I don't solve quadratic equations[br]to help me with my daily life,

0:01:37.230,0:01:40.343
but I do use mathematical thinking[br]to help me understand arguments

0:01:40.343,0:01:44.946
and to empathize with other people.

0:01:45.708,0:01:51.510
And so pure maths helps me[br]with the entire human world.

0:01:52.625,0:01:55.297
But before I talk about[br]the entire human world,

0:01:55.297,0:01:58.881
I need to talk about something[br]that you might think of

0:01:58.881,0:02:02.174
as irrelevant schools maths:

0:02:02.404,0:02:04.271
factors of numbers.

0:02:04.271,0:02:08.096
We're going to start by thinking[br]about the factors of 30.

0:02:08.096,0:02:12.886
Now, if this makes you shudder[br]with bad memories of school maths lessons,

0:02:12.886,0:02:13.914
I sympathize,

0:02:13.914,0:02:17.384
because I found school[br]maths lessons boring too.

0:02:17.640,0:02:21.673
But I'm pretty sure we are going[br]to take this in a direction

0:02:21.673,0:02:25.332
that is very different[br]from what happened at school.

0:02:25.941,0:02:28.122
So what are the factors of 30?[br]Well, they're the numbers that go into 30.

0:02:28.122,0:02:32.782
Maybe you can remember them.[br]We'll work them out.

0:02:32.782,0:02:37.190
It's one, two, three,

0:02:37.190,0:02:39.306
five, six,

0:02:39.306,0:02:42.227
10, 15, and 30.

0:02:42.227,0:02:44.196
It's not very interesting.

0:02:44.196,0:02:46.727
It's a bunch of numbers[br]in a straight line.

0:02:47.049,0:02:51.077
We can make it more interesting[br]by thinking about which of these numbers

0:02:51.077,0:02:53.358
are also factors of each other[br]and drawing a picture,

0:02:53.358,0:02:55.411
a bit like a family tree

0:02:55.411,0:02:56.587
to show those relationships.

0:02:56.587,0:03:00.653
So 30 is going to be at the top[br]like a kind of great-grandparent.

0:03:00.653,0:03:03.777
Six, 10, and 15 go into 30.

0:03:03.777,0:03:07.006
Five goes into 10 and 15.

0:03:07.192,0:03:09.656
Two goes in six and 10.

0:03:09.656,0:03:13.190
Three goes into six and 15.

0:03:13.190,0:03:17.266
And one goes into two, three, and five.

0:03:17.266,0:03:20.983
So now we see that 10[br]is not divisible by three,

0:03:20.983,0:03:24.231
but that is this the corners of a cube,

0:03:24.231,0:03:26.103
which is I think a bit more interesting

0:03:26.103,0:03:28.747
than a bunch of numbers[br]in a straight line.

0:03:29.518,0:03:32.690
We can see something more here.[br]There's a hierarchy going on.

0:03:32.690,0:03:34.893
At the bottom level is the number one,

0:03:34.893,0:03:36.987
then there's the numbers[br]two, three, and five,

0:03:36.987,0:03:39.870
and nothing goes into those[br]except one and themselves.

0:03:39.870,0:03:42.350
You might remember[br]this means they're prime.

0:03:42.350,0:03:45.394
At the next level up,[br]we have six, 10, and 15,

0:03:45.394,0:03:48.904
and each of those is a product[br]of two prime factors.

0:03:48.904,0:03:51.002
So six is two times three,

0:03:51.002,0:03:52.623
10 is two times five,

0:03:52.623,0:03:54.593
15 is three times five,

0:03:54.593,0:03:56.500
and then at the top, we have 30,

0:03:56.500,0:03:59.103
which is a product of three prime numbers,

0:03:59.355,0:04:01.168
two times three times five.

0:04:01.168,0:04:05.583
So I could redraw this diagram[br]using those numbers instead.

0:04:06.581,0:04:09.672
So we see that we've got[br]two, three, and five at the top,

0:04:09.672,0:04:12.706
we have pairs of numbers[br]at the next level,

0:04:12.706,0:04:15.431
and we have single elements[br]at the next level,

0:04:15.431,0:04:17.470
and then the empty set at the bottom.

0:04:17.470,0:04:23.148
And each of those arrows shows[br]losing one of your numbers in the set.

0:04:23.148,0:04:25.435
Now maybe it can be clear

0:04:25.435,0:04:28.767
that it doesn't really matter[br]what those numbers are.

0:04:28.767,0:04:30.384
In fact it doesn't matter what they are.

0:04:30.384,0:04:34.020
So we could replace them with[br]something like A, B, and C instead

0:04:34.020,0:04:37.153
and we get the same picture.

0:04:37.343,0:04:39.943
So now this has become very abstract.

0:04:39.943,0:04:42.290
The numbers have turned into letters.

0:04:42.290,0:04:45.115
But there is a point to this abstraction,

0:04:45.115,0:04:50.335
which is that it now suddenly[br]becomes very widely applicable,

0:04:50.335,0:04:54.514
because A, B, and C could be anything.

0:04:54.514,0:04:58.681
For example, they could be[br]three types of privilege:

0:04:58.681,0:05:01.705
rich, white, and male.

0:05:02.569,0:05:06.606
So then at the next level,[br]we have rich white people.

0:05:06.606,0:05:09.151
Here we have rich male people.

0:05:09.151,0:05:11.533
Here we have white male people.

0:05:11.533,0:05:15.463
Then we have rich, white, and male.

0:05:15.463,0:05:18.675
And finally people with[br]none of those types of privilege.

0:05:18.675,0:05:21.958
And I'm going to put back in[br]the rest of the adjectives for emphasis.

0:05:21.958,0:05:24.887
So here we have rich white[br]non-male people,

0:05:24.887,0:05:27.928
to remind us that there are[br]non-binary people we need to include.

0:05:27.928,0:05:30.566
Here we have rich non-white male people.

0:05:30.566,0:05:34.001
Here we have non-rich white male people,

0:05:34.001,0:05:36.844
rich non-white non-male,

0:05:36.844,0:05:40.118
non-rich white non-male,

0:05:40.118,0:05:41.839
and non-rich, non-white male,

0:05:41.839,0:05:43.815
and, and at the bottom[br]with the least privilege,

0:05:43.815,0:05:47.984
non-rich, not-white, non-male people.

0:05:47.984,0:05:51.819
We have gone from a diagram[br]of factors of 30

0:05:51.819,0:05:56.320
to a diagram of interaction[br]of different types of privilege,

0:05:56.320,0:05:59.965
and there are many things[br]we can learn from this diagram, I think.

0:05:59.965,0:06:07.483
The first is that each arrow represents[br]a direct loss of one type of privilege.

0:06:07.483,0:06:12.193
Sometimes people mistakenly think[br]that white privilege means

0:06:12.193,0:06:16.526
all white people are better off[br]than all non-white people.

0:06:16.526,0:06:20.261
Some people point at superrich[br]black sports stars and say,

0:06:20.261,0:06:24.180
"See? They're really rich.[br]White privilege doesn't exist."

0:06:24.180,0:06:27.287
But that's not what the theory[br]of white privilege says.

0:06:27.287,0:06:32.561
It says that if that superrich sports star[br]had all the same characteristics

0:06:32.561,0:06:34.294
but they were also white,

0:06:34.294,0:06:39.025
we would expect them[br]to be better off in society.

0:06:39.485,0:06:42.310
There is something else[br]we can understand from this diagram

0:06:42.310,0:06:44.319
if we look along a row.

0:06:44.319,0:06:48.517
If we look along the second-to-top row,[br]where people have two types of privilege,

0:06:48.517,0:06:50.732
we might be able to see

0:06:50.732,0:06:52.584
that they're not all particularly equal.

0:06:52.584,0:06:54.553
For example, rich white women

0:06:54.553,0:06:58.837
are probably much better off in society

0:06:58.837,0:07:00.942
than poor white men,

0:07:00.942,0:07:04.027
and rich black men are probably[br]somewhere in between.

0:07:04.027,0:07:06.748
So it's really more skewed like this,

0:07:06.748,0:07:09.244
and the same on the bottom level.

0:07:09.244,0:07:11.712
But we can actually take it further

0:07:11.712,0:07:15.307
and look at the interactions[br]between those two middle levels,

0:07:15.307,0:07:18.721
because rich non-white non-men[br]might well be better off in society

0:07:18.721,0:07:23.306
than poor white men.

0:07:23.306,0:07:28.616
Think about some extreme examples,[br]like Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfrey.

0:07:28.616,0:07:33.977
They're definitely better off[br]than poor white unemployed homeless men.

0:07:34.324,0:07:37.655
So actually the diagram[br]is more skewed like this.

0:07:37.655,0:07:40.667
And that tension exists

0:07:40.667,0:07:43.740
between the layers[br]of privilege in the diagram

0:07:43.740,0:07:47.413
and the absolute privilege[br]that people experience in society.

0:07:47.413,0:07:53.429
And this has helped me to understand[br]why some poor white men

0:07:53.429,0:07:54.857
are so angry in society at the moment,

0:07:54.857,0:07:58.874
because they are considered to be high up[br]in this cuboid of privilege,

0:07:58.874,0:08:03.803
but in terms of absolute privilege,[br]they don't actually feel the effect of it.

0:08:04.021,0:08:07.287
And I believe that understanding[br]the root of that anger

0:08:07.287,0:08:11.953
is much more productive[br]than just being angry at them in return.

0:08:13.503,0:08:15.552
Seeing these abstract structures

0:08:15.552,0:08:18.185
can also help us switch contexts

0:08:18.185,0:08:21.764
and see that different people[br]are at the top in different contexts.

0:08:21.764,0:08:23.567
In our original diagram,

0:08:23.567,0:08:25.552
rich white men were at the top,

0:08:25.552,0:08:28.951
but if we restricted[br]our attention to non-men,

0:08:28.951,0:08:31.309
we would see that they are here,

0:08:31.309,0:08:33.813
and now the rich white[br]non-men are at the top.

0:08:33.813,0:08:36.681
So we could move to[br]a whole context of women,

0:08:36.681,0:08:41.740
and our three types of privilege[br]could now be rich, white, and cisgendered.

0:08:41.740,0:08:46.001
Remember that cisgendered means[br]that your gender identity does match

0:08:46.001,0:08:48.212
the gender you were assigned at birth.

0:08:48.212,0:08:54.155
So now we see that rich white cis women[br]occupy the analogous situation

0:08:54.155,0:08:57.352
that rich white men did[br]in broader society,

0:08:57.352,0:09:00.962
and this has helped me understand[br]why there is so much anger

0:09:00.962,0:09:02.898
towards rich white women,

0:09:02.898,0:09:06.105
especially in some parts[br]of the feminist movement at the moment,

0:09:06.105,0:09:09.894
because perhaps they're prone[br]to seeing themselves as underprivileged

0:09:09.894,0:09:11.666
relative to white men,

0:09:11.666,0:09:16.496
and they forget how overprivileged[br]they are relative to non-white women.

0:09:17.627,0:09:23.178
We can all use these abstract structures[br]to help us pivot between situations

0:09:23.178,0:09:26.928
in which we are more privileged[br]and less privileged.

0:09:26.928,0:09:29.668
We are all more privileged than somebody

0:09:29.668,0:09:32.512
and less privileged than somebody else.

0:09:32.512,0:09:35.298
For example, I know and I feel

0:09:35.298,0:09:37.837
that as an Asian person,

0:09:37.837,0:09:42.054
I am less privileged than white people[br]because of white privilege,

0:09:42.054,0:09:44.995
but I also understand that I am probably

0:09:44.995,0:09:47.793
among the most privileged[br]of non-white people,

0:09:47.793,0:09:51.818
and this helps me pivot[br]between those two contexts.

0:09:51.818,0:09:53.487
And in terms of wealth,

0:09:53.487,0:09:55.436
I don't think I'm superrich.

0:09:55.436,0:09:58.415
I'm not as rich as the kind of people[br]who don't have to work,

0:09:58.415,0:10:00.085
but I am doing fine,

0:10:00.085,0:10:03.000
and that's a much better[br]situation to be in

0:10:03.000,0:10:04.541
than people who are really struggling,

0:10:04.541,0:10:07.895
maybe are unemployed[br]or working at minimum wage.

0:10:08.788,0:10:11.911
I perform these pivots in my head

0:10:11.911,0:10:18.657
to help me understand experiences[br]from other people's points of view,

0:10:18.849,0:10:23.560
which brings me to this[br]possibly surprising conclusion:

0:10:23.560,0:10:26.133
that abstract mathematics

0:10:26.133,0:10:28.662
is highly relevant to our daily lives

0:10:28.662,0:10:37.223
and can even help us to understand[br]and empathize with other people.

0:10:38.846,0:10:44.508
My wish is that everybody would try[br]to understand other people more

0:10:44.508,0:10:46.679
and work with them together,

0:10:46.679,0:10:48.786
rather than competing with them

0:10:48.786,0:10:52.262
and trying to show that they're wrong.

0:10:52.262,0:10:56.852
And I believe that abstract[br]mathematical thinking

0:10:56.852,0:10:59.974
can help us achieve that.

0:10:59.974,0:11:02.118
Thank you.

0:11:02.118,0:11:06.273
(Applause)