DW Africa said: thanks for commenting. Can you please also provide us with the name of one mathematician you know of? Usiku A said: As a natural part of evolution of humans, it was the female who first noticed and kept track of her 5 days menstrual flow, 28 day cycle and 9 months pregnancy gestation. This she did in conjunction with the Moon. Females were the first counters and the first to more formally connect events above to events below. There is no other reasonable naturally occurring basis to suggest or support males as being the first to develop a system of counting. There was no pressing ever-present necessity for males to be the mothers of inventing counting cycles as the first step of mathematics. This process leads us to conclude females were the first mathematicians and likely the first to advance how to track celestial events to human events and other plant, animal and earth cycles. This is basically how human knowledge was developed through being taught from the nature of our own bodies and the nature surrounding us. Also, as a matter of causation, the female was considered not only the first parent, but for a while she was considered the only parent. This was so due to humans not yet connecting the role of sex to childbirth. So as far as a specific name and a specific person I have none, because females were the first mathematicians by default of gender, not by default of superior intelligence. Math, as we now call it, was just something they had to pay attention to the details of. Thanks for showing interest in learning and providing an opportunity to share understandings.
Closing Thoughts
Perhaps you will notice the dead silence lack of response to my lengthy thoughtful response. Who does that in a conversation? Why? The reason is common and can be found in the reasoning of the subtext of our miseducated consciousness that is being informed by our malnourished subconscious.What is in the subtext of DW and also in your subtext is the fragmented limitation regarding “ways of knowing.”
Free yourself from one way of knowing, unless it is the universal way of knowing. Of a truth, we currently learn in the most limited way of knowing, which is why our level of awareness is mostly Giri So. Here's the ridiculousness of our thinking.
Give me a name so I can know it's true.
Wait, now give me a date.
Wait, now give me a place where.
Wait, now give me a book that confirms it? Of course that thought process is ridiculous because it cancels out how humans learned in the first place without having any of those things we now require to convince us something is true.
