BEYOND THE TWILIGHT OF REASON
379
special relativity or quantum mechanics, we would almost certainly re–
ceive a blank stare. Conversely, if we were to ask the average scientist to
write an essay on Plato's political ideas, we would be met by the same
blank stare. To a large extent, most of the literate in this world are
mathematically illiterate, and most of our scientists never give much
thought to understanding of non-scientific ideas. In fact, this has been of
great concern to me, since I returned to the academic world about three
years ago.
I discovered that for many years Columbia University has had a core
curriculum. I was asked to chair a committee which was to concern itself
with the future of Columbia College. This core curriculum had out–
standing introductions to philosophy, history, the humanities, and
Western civilization. But nowhere was there an overall discussion of sci–
ence. So I tried to convince my colleagues that this core curriculum
ought to include the basics of science, so that a student after completing
his undergraduate education wouldn't be completely ignorant of what
relativity or quantum mechanics are all about. Oddly enough, it was the
scientists on this committee who objected. They saw no reason to waste
time away from their research and graduate students, to bother with a
group of undergraduates who really didn't know much about anything.
That is what got me interested in this whole area. Let me start with
mathematics. Mathematics, of course, ties together much of science, espe–
cially the physical sciences. Whenever I mention the word "calculus" to a
group of undergraduates, I get a condescending stare. Never mind the
fact that calculus is no more than cunning arithmetic. The mere word
sends shivers down the spines of most literati. Yet the concepts inherent
in calculus are so simple, being no more than addition and subtraction,
that a literate person should feel ashamed at not understanding them.
Why, we might ask, is this fear of mathematics so pervasive? I have no
doubt that the fault lies with the educational system which considers
mathematics not an interesting subject but a necessary tool for a career in
technology. If you're not going in for a career in engineering or science,
why bother?
It
was not always this way. Some of the greatest scholars and
philosophers in history were also conversant with the mathematical
knowledge of the time. In fact, in our century, one of our most re–
nowned philosophers, Bertrand Russell, was a world-class mathematician.
Mathematics should be thought of as a great intellectual experience,
profoundly beautiful, a form of poetry. I find it amazing, for example,
that the University of Rochester, one of our foremost institutions of
higher learning, should consider eliminating its graduate mathematics de–
partment. Today's typical undergraduate learns nothing about group
theory or number theory, about complex analysis, topology or differential
