2 of 3

Our very human limitations play a larger role in the second section. The role of mathematics in Western culture is sobering. Not just the Pythagoreans (who almost worshiped number) but Greek civilization itself placed pure math and geometry on a near-idolatrous pedestal. In Christian Europe, though, beginning with very worthy ideas of understanding God by understanding the order in his creation, thinkers like Descartes, Newton, and others left a smaller and smaller explicit role for him in it. So much is well known, and well described here. More troubling is the discussion of how over several centuries not only the physical sciences but also to a large extent social science and even the humanities were "mathematized"; that is, quantifiable elements became more and more prominent, with human reason the final arbiter, while anything inaccessible to these methods was jettisoned. Today we see this in how Westerners think of time, space, business, politics, and intelligence. Our authors sketch a response; it condemns the Enlightenment model as the idolatry it is, but calls for a stronger cultural structure for our use of mathematics, so that we do not lose the cultural benefits of our science in the influence of postmodernism. Agree or not, this requires action.

The final section is a smorgasbord of contemporary issues. As a newer teacher of math, I want to know what role rote processes have compared with group projects; chapter 12 chronicles recent battles over math standards involving just such issues. Being at a research-oriented department, I appreciate the proposed Christian response here, which affirms centering the learning environment on the student (as made imago Dei), humbles us in recognizing we cannot know everything (even in math), and criticizes recent theory claiming students are autonomous learners (God is our source). Similarly, chapter 11 reviews psychological research that examines how we learn more abstract concepts, while insisting (against usual research bias) that this window to learners is limited. Other sections readers of this journal will want to take note of include a synopsis of the mathematical aspects of Intelligent Design theory and the limitations of artificial intelligence.

And it is all readers of this review who can read this book profitably. Certainly Christian mathematicians should be reading MPA, as the essentials in math history and philosophy are covered in the acknowledgement of Christ as Lord. However, the issues raised are of general interest; the latter chapters could almost be published as separate, cost-effective pamphlets. I have already mentioned the call for change in the over-mathematization of Western culture. Social scientists should start formulating wise rules for the use of quantification in their disciplines; business and government leaders likewise can take this advice to heart, before we destroy our institutions with too much (or too little) math. That's not all, though. Historians will gain good examples from the comparison of math in ancient Greece, medieval Islam, and pre-colonial China. Teachers and parents can start to discuss secondary math reform responsibly using this resource; mathematicians of any (or no) religion can finally start to understand their Christian colleagues.

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

February (Web-only) 2003, Vol. 47