# Mathematics & Social Mores

Anyone can tell a story. If a story is linear enough in the sense that there exists a *trigger*, and an *outcome*, there always will exist some mathematical process that fits the story.

At the most basic level, with *x* as *trigger*, and *y* as *outcome*, the mathematical process,

y=bx

produces a feasible mathematical process. Creation of a mathematical process is evident in the mathematical fact that:

dy/dx = b,

with outcome, the relatively simple mathematical process, *y=bx* enables arrival at differential calculus.

Existence of a mathematical process that fits a story is not, however, proof that the story is activated by the mathematical process. This is essence of interpretations of regressions that examine relations within populations as associations, as opposed to causality.

When a story is, itself, outcome of a mathematical process, the story need not be told. Absent assumption of any story, in of itself, the mathematical process demonstrates existence of the story. Whenever mathematical models have rigor of contributions to solving of real life problems, such mathematical models create their own stories, are not models created to fit a story that already is formulated by those who build the mathematical model.

Mathematical processes that produce meaningful contributions to solving of real world problems are not created to fit stories, are robust enough to tell their own stories.

Consider then the notion (feasible social more) that White people are superior to every other race. This is a story, a feasible story. The *outcome*, *y*, is ubiquity of attainment to civilizations within populations of Caucasian Whites. This simultaneously is tantamount to dearth of attainment to civilizations within populations of non-Caucasian Whites. The trigger, *x* is the assumption, or perhaps, hypothesis that Caucasian Whites inherently are superior to every other race. So then, with ranking of *proximity of attainment to a civilization* as outcome (*y*), and *race *as trigger (*x*), we arrive at a feasible mathematical process for the feasible social more, which is,

Attainment to Civilization = b[Race].

The evidence that the mathematical process embedded in ‘Attainment to Civilization =b[Race]

’merely is a feasible process, as opposed to the cause of the story?

If Caucasian Whites inherently are superior to other races, this ought to be evident in some genetic differences. After years and years of testing, geneticists all agree that they are unable to find any genes that suggest superiority of one race over another. It is not just that Whites cannot be shown to be superior to Blacks, but also that Blacks cannot be shown to be superior to either of Caucasian Whites or Russians. The evidence is so strong, not even the most ardent honest scientists with leanings towards White supremacy are able to find genetic evidence supportive of superiority of Caucasian Whites.

We arrive then at the inference that while

Attainment to Civilization =b[Race],

is a feasible mathematical process, the empirical evidence provides a sound rejection of the story, and of the accompanying mathematical process. Yet, Caucasian Whites remain ubiquitously more likely to be associated with civilizations. This, however, is evidence for validity of the following scientific norm (which is, embedded in our colloquial saying that, *‘the sun rises in the east, and sets in the west,’* when in fact, it is rotation of the earth that creates semblance of movement of the sun from east to west).

A matter that is observationally factual does not in of itself necessarily embed or imply a causality.

It is well established that *demonstrated intelligence* is not a function of *native intelligence* only, is affected by the *environment*. The mere fact that *asking of questions*, and *altruistic provision of knowledge* are not encouraged in most of Africa, for instance, possesses implications for arrival at demonstrations of intelligence. We have then that if you take an American child who is considered to be highly intelligent, and relocate such a child to Africa, if this child can be sequestered from Western influence, many years later, the child’s *demonstrated intellectual intelligence* will differ significantly from demonstrated intelligence of a similar child who remains within the United States.

While Tarzan is jungle smart, he simultaneously is lacking in demonstrated intellectual intelligence.

In presence of the foregoing, we arrive at yet another mathematical process, which potentially can explain association of Caucasian Whites with ubiquity of attainment to civilizations.

Let *intellectual environment* be *trigger*, and let intellectual environment created by Causasian Whites differ from intellectual environments created by non-Caucasian Whites. Then with *attainment to civilizations* as outcome, *y_2*, and *intellectual environment* as trigger *x_2*, we arrive again at feasible mathematical process,

Attainment to Civilization = b_2[Environment].

Denote the immediately preceding feasible mathematical process, the *Environmental Mathematical Process (EMP)*.

Is there any support for validity of EMP?

Absolutely.

With respect to *Whites vis-a-vis African American Blacks — *the two groups that have been studied the most in context of rigorous scientific research that relates to such matters* — *there is clear evidence that while White children are more likely to be exposed to good books early on in life, and more likely to be both encouraged to read, and to acquire a love of reading, this is much less the case among African American Blacks. The studies that have established this result are far too numerous to mention. A cursory search on Google Scholar is sufficient for procurement of the research evidence.

Is it not obvious that demonstrated intelligence cannot be dissociated from store of knowledge, and capacity for interpretation of knowledge?

The Dystopian Ending? In the quest for creation of a society within which truth no longer is objective, Caucasian Whites have been leveraging significantly on poetry for teaching of English to High School students.

It objectively is true that poetry has value only if it’s meaning is somewhat shrouded, with outcome 10 different readers are able to ascribe 10 different meanings to the same poem.

But if interpretation of English is learnt in entirety in context of poetry, *language*, which itself is scientific, and which must have rigor of scientific interpretation if communication is to be effective, is transformed into a subjective art, with outcome interpretation of knowledge becomes in entirety, subjective.

So then, now White kids read, and are encouraged to love to read. Given every interpretation of a poem confers on itself it’s very own legitimacy, however, simultaneously, the system teaches White kids how not to arrive at rigor of interpretation of whatever it is that they read.

**So now, White parents pay bribes to get their children, who now no longer are able to outperform Black kids, into top schools. Hence, arrival at a Dystopian Ending.**

Do older White generations understand what they are doing to their younger generations, or are they just caught up in their misplaced agenda for creation of a society that is lacking in objective standards for morality?

With respect to objectivity or subjectivity of morality, there does not exist any Greek Philosopher worth his salt who believed in absence of objective standards for morality. *Aristotle*, *Seneca, *and all of the other Greek philosophers believed that philosophy was about the search for *objective (true) morality*, and that part of the reason for governance was mediation of accepted standards for objective morality.

All of the ancient Greek philosophers believed that philosophy attained it’s highest value and relevance in context of searches for boundaries of objective morality.

It perhaps is important to note at this juncture that *a*** legal code does not necessarily equate to accepted standards of morality**. Sometimes laws on the books reflect attitudes of much older generations. Sometimes, the law is there only for identification of those who got caught, or those who lacked support from a faction. Sometimes the law exists only to serve and protect the already-rich and/or powerful, who have convinced the masses that their interests are best served by hatefulness of interactions between all those who have yet to become rich. This of course ensures that the rich get richer, and that the

*not-so-rich*are such that every period, proportion

*k*is rising, and proportion (

*1-k)*is falling. With constituents of

*k*and (

*1-k)*alternating over time, over long stretches of time, aggregate wealth owned by the

*not-so-rich*does not move an inch, with outcome, relative to the

*already rich*, the

*not-so-rich*in essence become poorer.

So then, with *rigor of philosophical thought*, equivalently, *intelligence *as outcome, *y_3*, and *search for objective standards of morality* as *trigger*, *x_3*, ancient philosophers predict that,

Intelligence = b_3[Search for Objective Morality].

It perhaps is the case that the decay of intelligence within Western society cannot be dissociated from intentional deviation from the mathematical process proffered by ancient philosophers that *rigor of philosophical thought*, that is, *demonstrated intelligence* (** as evident in association of intelligence with a ‘Doctor of Philosophy’**) ought to consist, at least in part, in searches for objective standards of morality. Within each specific discipline, searches for objective standards of morality translate into searches for truths that, within each discipline, can be deemed to be objective.

But then again, just because deviations from a mathematical process fit a story does not imply that the mathematical process qualifies as a truism.

Enter then the demand for evidence.