-
The world is awash
with divisive arguments,
-
conflict,
-
fake news,
-
victimhood,
-
exploitation, prejudice,
bigotry, blame, shouting
-
and minuscule attention spans.
-
It can sometimes seem
that we are doomed to take sides,
-
be stuck in echo chambers
-
and never agree again.
-
It can sometimes seem
like a race to the bottom,
-
where everyone is calling out
somebody else's privilege
-
and vying to show that they
are the most hard-done-by person
-
in the conversation.
-
How can we make sense
-
in a world that doesn't?
-
I have a tool for understanding
this confusing world of ours,
-
a tool that you might not expect:
-
abstract mathematics.
-
I am a pure mathematician.
-
Traditionally, pure maths
is like the theory of maths,
-
where applied maths is applied
to real problems like building bridges
-
and flying planes
-
and controlling traffic flow.
-
But I'm going to talk about a way
that pure maths applies directly
-
to our daily lives
-
as a way of thinking.
-
I don't solve quadratic equations
to help me with my daily life,
-
but I do use mathematical thinking
to help me understand arguments
-
and to empathize with other people.
-
And so pure maths helps me
with the entire human world.
-
But before I talk about
the entire human world,
-
I need to talk about something
that you might think of
-
as irrelevant schools maths:
-
factors of numbers.
-
We're going to start
by thinking about the factors of 30.
-
Now, if this makes you shudder
with bad memories of school maths lessons,
-
I sympathize, because I found
school maths lessons boring, too.
-
But I'm pretty sure we are going
to take this in a direction
-
that is very different
from what happened at school.
-
So what are the factors of 30?
-
Well, they're the numbers that go into 30.
-
Maybe you can remember them.
We'll work them out.
-
It's one, two, three,
-
five, six,
-
10, 15 and 30.
-
It's not very interesting.
-
It's a bunch of numbers
in a straight line.
-
We can make it more interesting
-
by thinking about which of these numbers
are also factors of each other
-
and drawing a picture,
a bit like a family tree,
-
to show those relationships.
-
So 30 is going to be at the top
like a kind of great-grandparent.
-
Six, 10 and 15 go into 30.
-
Five goes into 10 and 15.
-
Two goes into six and 10.
-
Three goes into six and 15.
-
And one goes into two, three and five.
-
So now we see that 10
is not divisible by three,
-
but that this is the corners of a cube,
-
which is, I think, a bit more interesting
-
than a bunch of numbers
in a straight line.
-
We can see something more here.
There's a hierarchy going on.
-
At the bottom level is the number one,
-
then there's the numbers
two, three and five,
-
and nothing goes into those
except one and themselves.
-
You might remember
this means they're prime.
-
At the next level up,
we have six, 10 and 15,
-
and each of those is a product
of two prime factors.
-
So six is two times three,
-
10 is two times five,
-
15 is three times five.
-
And then at the top, we have 30,
-
which is a product
of three prime numbers --
-
two times three times five.
-
So I could redraw this diagram
using those numbers instead.
-
We see that we've got
two, three and five at the top,
-
we have pairs of numbers
at the next level,
-
and we have single elements
at the next level
-
and then the empty set at the bottom.
-
And each of those arrows shows
losing one of your numbers in the set.
-
Now maybe it can be clear
-
that it doesn't really matter
what those numbers are.
-
In fact, it doesn't matter what they are.
-
So we could replace them with
something like A, B and C instead,
-
and we get the same picture.
-
So now this has become very abstract.
-
The numbers have turned into letters.
-
But there is a point to this abstraction,
-
which is that it now suddenly
becomes very widely applicable,
-
because A, B and C could be anything.
-
For example, they could be
three types of privilege:
-
rich, white and male.
-
So then at the next level,
we have rich white people.
-
Here we have rich male people.
-
Here we have white male people.
-
Then we have rich, white and male.
-
And finally, people with none
of those types of privilege.
-
And I'm going to put back in
the rest of the adjectives for emphasis.
-
So here we have rich, white
non-male people,
-
to remind us that there are
nonbinary people we need to include.
-
Here we have rich, nonwhite male people.
-
Here we have non-rich, white male people,
-
rich, nonwhite, non-male,
-
non-rich, white, non-male
-
and non-rich, nonwhite, male.
-
And at the bottom,
with the least privilege,
-
non-rich, nonwhite, non-male people.
-
We have gone from a diagram
of factors of 30
-
to a diagram of interaction
of different types of privilege.
-
And there are many things
we can learn from this diagram, I think.
-
The first is that each arrow represents
a direct loss of one type of privilege.
-
Sometimes people mistakenly think
that white privilege means
-
all white people are better off
than all nonwhite people.
-
Some people point at superrich
black sports stars and say,
-
"See? They're really rich.
White privilege doesn't exist."
-
But that's not what the theory
of white privilege says.
-
It says that if that superrich sports star
had all the same characteristics
-
but they were also white,
-
we would expect them
to be better off in society.
-
There is something else
we can understand from this diagram
-
if we look along a row.
-
If we look along the second-to-top row,
where people have two types of privilege,
-
we might be able to see
that they're not all particularly equal.
-
For example, rich white women
are probably much better off in society
-
than poor white men,
-
and rich black men are probably
somewhere in between.
-
So it's really more skewed like this,
-
and the same on the bottom level.
-
But we can actually take it further
-
and look at the interactions
between those two middle levels,
-
because rich, nonwhite non-men
might well be better off in society
-
than poor white men.
-
Think about some extreme
examples, like Michelle Obama,
-
Oprah Winfrey.
-
They're definitely better off
than poor, white, unemployed homeless men.
-
So actually, the diagram
is more skewed like this.
-
And that tension exists
-
between the layers
of privilege in the diagram
-
and the absolute privilege
that people experience in society.
-
And this has helped me to understand
why some poor white men
-
are so angry in society at the moment,
-
because they are considered to be high up
in this cuboid of privilege,
-
but in terms of absolute privilege,
they don't actually feel the effect of it.
-
And I believe that understanding
the root of that anger
-
is much more productive
than just being angry at them in return.
-
Seeing these abstract structures
can also help us switch contexts
-
and see that different people
are at the top in different contexts.
-
In our original diagram,
-
rich white men were at the top,
-
but if we restricted
our attention to non-men,
-
we would see that they are here,
-
and now the rich, white
non-men are at the top.
-
So we could move to
a whole context of women,
-
and our three types of privilege
could now be rich, white and cisgendered.
-
Remember that "cisgendered" means
that your gender identity does match
-
the gender you were assigned at birth.
-
So now we see that rich, white cis women
occupy the analogous situation
-
that rich white men did
in broader society,
-
and this has helped me understand
why there is so much anger
-
towards rich white women,
-
especially in some parts
of the feminist movement at the moment,
-
because perhaps they're prone
to seeing themselves as underprivileged
-
relative to white men,
-
and they forget how overprivileged
they are relative to nonwhite women.
-
We can all use these abstract structures
to help us pivot between situations
-
in which we are more privileged
and less privileged.
-
We are all more privileged than somebody
-
and less privileged than somebody else.
-
For example, I know and I feel
that as an Asian person,
-
I am less privileged than white people
-
because of white privilege.
-
But I also understand
-
that I am probably among
the most privileged of nonwhite people,
-
and this helps me pivot
between those two contexts.
-
And in terms of wealth,
-
I don't think I'm superrich.
-
I'm not as rich as the kind of people
who don't have to work,
-
but I am doing fine,
-
and that's a much better
situation to be in
-
than people who are really struggling,
-
maybe are unemployed
or working at minimum wage.
-
I perform these pivots in my head
-
to help me understand experiences
from other people's points of view,
-
which brings me to this
possibly surprising conclusion:
-
that abstract mathematics
is highly relevant to our daily lives
-
and can even help us to understand
and empathize with other people.
-
My wish is that everybody would try
to understand other people more
-
and work with them together,
-
rather than competing with them
-
and trying to show that they're wrong.
-
And I believe that abstract
mathematical thinking
-
can help us achieve that.
-
Thank you.
-
(Applause)