Writing mathematical proofs has greatly improved my life

[Jamin2112]

After 1-2 years of writing formal math proofs in undergraduate school, I now speak and write much more eloquently than I used to. Now, before uttering or writing a statement, I take a quick pause to ask myself whether

it's logically valid;
it's unambiguous;
it's relevant and sequentially fluid, if it's in the context of other statements I've made;
it's concise, using the absolute fewest words possible.I'm not exaggerating the least bit. And this why talking to women (which I rarely do) is so annoying: they use 5 times as many words as necessary, without logical coherence, relevance, or anything that makes a math proof "elegant."

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

And this why talking to women (which I rarely do) is so annoying: they use 5 times as many words as necessary.

You're right. The last time I spoke to a woman she said "Go jump in the lake", when a simple "no" would have sufficed.

 

[bugatti79]

You're right. The last time I spoke to a woman she said "Go jump in the lake", when a simple "no" would have sufficed.

:rofl:

Are you still hunting women jimmy?

:-)

 

[20Tauri]

And this why talking to women (which I rarely do) is so annoying: they use 5 times as many words as necessary, without logical coherence, relevance, or anything that makes a math proof "elegant."

Wow. That's kind of an awful thing to say. I am a woman who is perfectly capable of writing math proofs and making logical arguments, and no, I don't hold my speech to the same standards as my mathematics. It's not that I am illogical or incapable of appreciating elegance. It's just that not everything I say is calculated to be amazing. I can write poetry, too, but I don't speak in sonnet form all the time.

 

[Matterwave]

After 1-2 years of writing formal math proofs in undergraduate school, I now speak and write much more eloquently than I used to. Now, before uttering or writing a statement, I take a quick pause to ask myself whether

it's logically valid;
it's unambiguous;
it's relevant and sequentially fluid, if it's in the context of other statements I've made;
it's concise, using the absolute fewest words possible.


I'm not exaggerating the least bit. And this why talking to women (which I rarely do) is so annoying: they use 5 times as many words as necessary, without logical coherence, relevance, or anything that makes a math proof "elegant."

Nice misogynist twist at the end there buddy.

 

[Office_Shredder]

And this why talking to women (which I rarely do)

I see

 

[Jack21222]

Wow. That's kind of an awful thing to say. I am a woman who is perfectly capable of writing math proofs and making logical arguments, and no, I don't hold my speech to the same standards as my mathematics. It's not that I am illogical or incapable of appreciating elegance. It's just that not everything I say is calculated to be amazing. I can write poetry, too, but I don't speak in sonnet form all the time.

There's a little bit of truth in what he says in American culture. At least from what I learned in my "teaching in a diverse society" class. Women in American society are taught from a very young age to not be direct. They're taught to be more subtle with their requests. One example given in the textbook used in the class was a couple on a road trip. The wife in the passenger seat says to her husband "would you like to stop and eat?" The husband responds "nah, I'm not hungry" and keeps driving. The wife then gets angry at the husband, because she was hungry and wanted to stop.

It's not a matter of women speaking in "sonnet form" as you say, but rather generally being indirect. Perhaps this indirectness is what causes the women in the OP's life to use more words than necessary.

 

[Moonbear]

One example given in the textbook used in the class was a couple on a road trip. The wife in the passenger seat says to her husband "would you like to stop and eat?" The husband responds "nah, I'm not hungry" and keeps driving. The wife then gets angry at the husband, because she was hungry and wanted to stop.

It's not a matter of women speaking in "sonnet form" as you say, but rather generally being indirect. Perhaps this indirectness is what causes the women in the OP's life to use more words than necessary.

Okay, I never needed textbook to figure out that approach never works (not with other women either). But, it isn't just women who do that. My boyfriend asks the exact same way. I've just learned the best answer to something like, "are you hungry for lunch yet," if I'm not, is "not yet, but how hungry are you? Can you wait or do you want something now?" Sometimes the answer is he's starving and we get something like deli sandwiches that I can get wrapped to go and eat later, and sometimes he can wait and is just noticing the time and actually checking if I'm hungry.

Though, the OP's view is dysfunctional at best. If your primary thought when meeting someone of the opposite sex is that they aren't efficiently using words, and you aren't gay, it's time to seek professional help, because that's not just being a shy or awkward geeky guy, which experience can cure, but seems more into the range of social disorders.

 

[zoobyshoe]

If your primary thought when meeting someone of the opposite sex is that they aren't efficiently using words, and you aren't gay, it's time to seek professional help...

What are you saying about gay people here, though? They pay attention to efficiency of communication because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex?

 

[Office_Shredder]

What are you saying about gay people here, though? They pay attention to efficiency of communication because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex?

The difference between something being a quirk or a disorder is the effect that it has on somebody's life. If you're gay, the fact that over-analyze how women speak doesn't really have a large effect on you... sure maybe you aren't great friends with these people, but no big deal. If you're not gay, it ruins your ability to form relationships, which is a significantly larger impact on quality of life

 

[chiro]

The difference between something being a quirk or a disorder is the effect that it has on somebody's life.

I agree with what you are saying but it is a pretty tough thing to thoroughly quantify and qualify something like this because we all have different ideas about what is 'disorderly' vs 'orderly'.

 

[zoobyshoe]

The difference between something being a quirk or a disorder is the effect that it has on somebody's life. If you're gay, the fact that over-analyze how women speak doesn't really have a large effect on you... sure maybe you aren't great friends with these people, but no big deal. If you're not gay, it ruins your ability to form relationships, which is a significantly larger impact on quality of life

I think the trouble with this line of reasoning would be that it seems to suggest it's OK to have a dysfunctional relationship any class of people you don't intend to be romantically involved with.

The interjection struck me as weird for the additional reason that, from what I've seen, most gay men really, really like women, and can automatically participate with them in the sort of "girl talk" that baffles the average non-gay guy. You don't actually see any of the sort of critical dismissal of women by gay men that's suggested by the interjection, "unless you're gay." Therefore it seems a counter-productive remark to throw into make the point trying to be made.

My own reaction to Jamin2112's report is that he's finding out that the more you pursue expertise in a limited field the more alienated you become from people outside that field in general, and that, if he actually paid attention, he'd see that a large percentage of guys don't communicate efficiently at all either.

 

[Moonbear]

What are you saying about gay people here, though? They pay attention to efficiency of communication because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex?

I said absolutely nothing about being gay other than to exclude them from my discussion of attraction to the opposite sex. You read the rest of that into the words but it was not said.

 

[dipole]

All the beauty and elegance of the world is worthless if you have no one to share it with. You'd better lighten up if you don't want to spend the rest of your life alone.

 

[zoobyshoe]

If your primary thought when meeting someone of the opposite sex is that they aren't efficiently using words, and you aren't gay, it's time to seek professional help...

What are you saying about gay people here, though? They pay attention to efficiency of communication because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex?

I said absolutely nothing about being gay other than to exclude them from my discussion of attraction to the opposite sex. You read the rest of that into the words but it was not said.

So, you're saying that if he weren't attracted to the opposite sex, then he wouldn't need professional help for having the primary thought in question. In other words, if he were gay, then that primary thought would be somehow OK.

 

[jim hardy]

I kinda echo zooby's previous point...

does OP notice that men do any better in everyday converstaion? Really ?

We guys are at a biological and cultural disadvantage - many of us find women so devastatingly, disarmingly attractive that we get tongue-tied and that makes conversation awkward. Women sense this and it puts them on edge too.

I suspect there's some projection afoot.
It's the barriers we put up for self defense that are our undoing.

As to subtlety in requests:
i learned early in my marriage the value of a good natured " That's a big ten- Yes, Dear ! " in bringing them to surface.

old jim

 

[Office_Shredder]

So, you're saying that if he weren't attracted to the opposite sex, then he wouldn't need professional help for having the primary thought in question. In other words, if he were gay, then that primary thought would be somehow OK.

People have thoughts all the time which we wouldn't deem OK. The question is how does it impact your life that determines whether you need help in ridding yourself of these thoughts.

 

[zoobyshoe]

People have thoughts all the time which we wouldn't deem OK. The question is how does it impact your life that determines whether you need help in ridding yourself of these thoughts.

I'm following what you're saying, and I don't see how the OP would ever manage to get a girlfriend with his attitude, which would certainly constitute an impact on his life. But he's not exactly asking for help or advice on how to change.

 

[BobG]

If your primary thought when meeting someone of the opposite sex is that they aren't efficiently using words, and you aren't gay, it's time to seek professional help, because ...

I think the trouble with this line of reasoning would be that it seems to suggest it's OK to have a dysfunctional relationship any class of people you don't intend to be romantically involved with.

I said absolutely nothing about being gay other than to exclude them from my discussion of attraction to the opposite sex. You read the rest of that into the words but it was not said.

So, you're saying that if he weren't attracted to the opposite sex, then he wouldn't need professional help for having the primary thought in question. In other words, if he were gay, then that primary thought would be somehow OK.

No, I think she's saying that if he's not gay, then his first thoughts when meeting a woman should be about sex.

I think she used way too many words to express that thought, though. :tongue2:

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

(Interesting trivia: During the early days of mining, using the restroom during the day presented a hygeine problem with so many miners stuck down there with nowhere to go. The solution was a toilet mounted on a small rail car which could be dragged out and emptied at the end of the day. One of the favorite pranks to play on a miner that failed to personally make sure the wheels were blocked were to send the rail car and toilet on a roll down the tunnel with the poor indisposed miner in the middle of his business. And the only warning the poor miner would get would be the sound of that chain being yanked by one of his coworkers.)

 

[MarcoD]

Actually, I think I don't like anyone who talks too much. Oh wait. I'll shut up.

 

[zoobyshoe]

That miner story is interesting. Make sure the wheels are blocked. I grasp it because one time in a Starbucks, I had to go so bad I didn't push the button in properly on the door handle. That was a mistake.

 

[Dembadon]

...

I'm not exaggerating the least bit. ...

And then you proceed to exaggerate:

... they use 5 times as many words as necessary, without logical coherence, relevance, or anything that makes a math proof "elegant."

 

[Jamin2112]

And then you proceed to exaggerate:

I now regret posting the afterthought about women, since it seems to have caused a garbagestorm and detracted from my main point. But anyways, I guess after further Google-researching the matter I found out that women only speaking a few hundred more words than men.

 

[JDStupi]

Lol, are you a real person, who actually feels this way?...Sometimes sitting on my computer, I feel like some people are just such "characters" that they are either not real, or are being deliberately "put on".

Women can be indirect, yes. That is true. I'm sure if you were to talk to a lot of men, they too, would not speak as concisely, logically, and clearly as you would like.

Life is not a proof. Enjoy ambiguity. I can see where the perceived indirectness of women would be problematic if you were emotionally involved with her and it lead to serious miscommunication or problems, but otherwise, why care?...Unless you have some type of emotional involvment with the situation. That is to say, maybe you are just failing in the social realm of women and rather than analyze yourself and seek the problem, (and or beat yourself up over it for a period of time, unless you already went through that stage) you blame it on the women. ...What's the first step of the proof?...State your assumptions. You seem to be assuming it is not you, it is them.

Do you attack all proofs with the same strategy or do different proofs demand different strategies?

That is to say, the methods of thinking and acting that work in one realm may not work in another. What's your universe of discourse? ... Just because I prove something in one universe doesn't imply that it holds in all others. Surely, you know this.

Don't be so quick to blame it on "the women". Your horizons will open if you do not insist that everybody be one way as opposed to another. Natural languages are not formal languages. "The map is not the territory". Good luck.

What was your main point? The part about thinking clearer? Then why are you in a "relationships" forum?...Or is your main point that you cannot talk to women, care about that and seek help but you couched it in misleading and un-necessary (indirect) terminology?

 

[MarcoD]

Personally, I blame the men. They clearly don't use enough words to form any normal emotional attachment.

 

[I like Serena]

Here's one where some poor guy wrote a lot of words and symbols, where the woman does not need words at all.
You may want to jump into a lake to cool off though.

Try not to get distracted by the hot chick.