Privilégio, poder e performatividade: a ética da matemática na sociedade e na educação




Os benefícios indiscutíveis e as virtudes intrínsecas da matemática não deveriam provocar uma cegueira quanto ao possível dano colateral provocado pela sua imensa, impiedosa e destrutiva força**, que é capaz de fazer a educação e a sociedade se renderem em direção a um futuro reformulado. Por causa do grande poder da matemática e da sua influência por toda a sociedade, é preciso realizar uma auditoria ética. Este artigo conduz uma crítica ética considerando quatro aspectos inter-relacionados da matemática na educação e na sociedade e seus impactos negativos. O primeiro deles é a supervalorização da matemática e os efeitos que este poder tem em manter privilégios; em seguida, os poderosos impactos negativos que estudar matemática têm em muitos estudantes de modo individual; terceiro: as aplicações visíveis, porém problemáticas, da matemática dentro da sociedade, as quais são protegidas de críticas porque a matemática continua a ser vista como neutra; o último aspecto é os efeitos profundos e performáticos das aplicações ocultas da matemática reformatadoras da sociedade e modificadoras da vida cotidiana, mas mantidas sem verificação em qualquer sentido. A maior parte deste artigo é dedicada a revelar estes efeitos prejudiciais. As soluções propostas que estão aqui servem para fomentar a consciência ética no estudo de matemática em todos os níveis e também para desafiar o estereótipo generalizado da matemática como algo eticamente neutro.

Palavras-chave: Matemática.  Ética. Poder. Sociedade.


Não há dados estatísticos.


Abtahi, Y., Gøtze, P. Steffensen, L. Hauge, K. H. and Barwell, B. (2017). Teaching Climate Change in Mathematics Classrooms: An Ethical Responsibility, The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, No. 32. Accessed 10 August 2019.

Allchin, D. (2004). Should the Sociology of Science Be Rated X? Science Education, Vol. 88, No. 6; pp. 934-946.

Bakan, J. (2004). The Corporation. London: Constable.

BBC News (2013). 'Dangerous' financial products named, 15 March 2013. Accessed 21 August 2018.

Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders, Oxford: Free Press.

Beer, D. (2016). Metric Power, London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Berman, E. and Hirschman, D. (2018). The Sociology of Quantification: Where Are We Now? Contemporary Sociology, Vol. 47, No. 3; pp. 257 - 266.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. J. G. Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood press. pp. 241-258.

Boylan, M. & Coles, A. (2017). Is Another Mathematics Education Possible? An Introduction To a Special Issue on Mathematics Education and the Living World: Responses to Ecological Crisis, The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, No. 32. Accessed 10 August 2019.

Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books.

Buerk, D. (1982). An experience with some able women who avoid mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics. Vol. 3, No. 2; pp. 19-24.

Buxton, L. (1981). Do you Panic about Maths? Coping with Maths Anxiety. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

Calıskan, K (2010). Market threads: how cotton farmers and traders create a global commodity. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

D’Ambrosio, U. (2007). Peace, Social Justice and Ethnomathematics. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, Monograph 1, 2007; pp. 25-34.

Davies, W. (2017). The Limits of Neoliberalism Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competition. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

De Mesquita, E. B. (2019). Economics After Neoliberalism - Quantification shapes how we think about public policy—often for the worse. Boston Review, Summer 2019 Issue. Accessed 15 August 2019.

EiM (no date). The Cambridge University Ethics in Mathematics Project. Accessed 24 July 2019.

Ernest, P. (1988). The Attitudes and Practices of Student Teachers of Primary School Mathematics, Proceedings of 12th International Psychology of Mathematics Education Conference, Veszprem, Hungary: OOK, Vol. 1; pp. 288-295.

Ernest, P. (1991). The Philosophy of Mathematics Education. London: Routledge.

Ernest, P. (2010) Why teach mathematics? Professional Educator, Vol. 9, No. 2 (June 2010) pp. 43-47. Accessed 18 November 2019.

Ernest, P. (2011). Mathematics and Special Educational Needs. Saarbrucken, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishing.

Ernest, P. (2018). The Ethics of Mathematics: Is Mathematics Harmful?. In P. Ernest (Ed.). The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Today. Switzerland: Springer, 2018.

Ernest, P. (in press). Mathematics, Ethics and Purism: An application of MacIntyre’s virtue theory. Forthcoming in Synthese, special issue on Virtue Theory of Mathematical Practices. Guest Editors: Andrew Aberdein, Colin Jakob Rittberg, Fenner Stanley Tanswell.

Evans, J. (2000). Mathematical Thinking and Emotions in Context: Adults, Practices and Numeracy, London: Routledge.

Fineman, S. (2004). Getting the Measure of Emotion - and the Cautionary Tale of Emotional Intelligence. Human Relations, Vol. 57; pp. 719-740.

Foucault, M. (1976). Discipline and Punish, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge (edited by C. Gordon), New York: Pantheon Books.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York. Basic Books.

Gorur, R. (2016). Seeing like PISA: A cautionary tale about the performativity of international assessments. European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 15, No. 5; pp. 598-616.

Gould, S. J. (1981). The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W.W. Norton.

Hayek, F. A. (1948). The use of knowledge in society. Individualism and the economic order. Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 77-91.

Kellert, S. R. & Wilson, E. O., Eds., (1995) The Biophilia Hypothesis. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press - A Shearwater book.

Kelman, H. C. (1973). Violence without moral restraint: reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers. Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 29, No. 4; pp. 25-62.

Lewis, M. (2019). Fit for purpose… Are we tracking our lives a fitbit too far. The Observer newspaper, UK. Sunday 10 November 2019, p. 50/

Marjanovic, O., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. & Vidgen, R. (2018). Algorithmic Pollution: Understanding and Responding to Negative Consequences of Algorithmic Decision-Making. U. Schultze, M. Aanestad, M. Mähring, C. Østerlund, & K. Riemer, Eds. Living with Monsters? Social Implications of Algorithmic Phenomena, Hybrid Agency, and the Performativity of Technology. Switzerland: Springer, 2018; p 31-47.

Maxwell, J. (1989). Mathephobia. P. Ernest, Ed., Mathematics Teaching: The State of the Art. London: Falmer Press; pp. 221-226.

Mennicken, A. & Espeland, W. N. (2019). What’s New with Numbers? Sociological Approaches to the Study of Quantification. Annual Review of Sociology. Vol. 45, No. 24; pp. 1–23.

Monbiot, G. (2017). Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems. The Guardian, 15 April 2016. Accessed 5 August 2019 (revised version).

Mutodi, P and Ngirande, H. (2014). The Influence of Students` Perceptions on Mathematics Performance. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 3; pp. 431-445.

National Numeracy (2015) The debate about a ‘maths gene’. Accessed 19 November 2019.

O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big date increase inequality and threatens democracy. New York, NY: Broadway books.

Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four: A Novel. London: Secker & Warburg.

Power, M. (1999). The Audit Society = Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Radical Statistics group (n. d.). About Us. Accessed 3 August 2017.

Raudenbush, S. W. (1984). Magnitude of teacher expectancy effects on pupil IQ as a function of the credibility of expectancy induction: A synthesis of findings from 18 experiments. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 76, No. 1; pp. 85–97.

Rosenthal, R. and Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the Classroom. New York, USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Russell, B., and Einstein, A. (1955). The Russell-Einstein Manifesto. Accessed 23 April 2015.

Sells, L. W. (1978). Mathematics - Critical Filter. The Science Teacher, 1978 (February); pp. 28-29.

Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science, Vol. 29, No. 4; pp. 549-571.

Skovsmose, O. and Ravn, O. (2019). Connecting Humans to Equations - A Reinterpretation of the Philosophy of Mathematics. Switzerland: Springer Nature.

Skovsmose, O. Ed, (2014). Critique as Uncertainty. Charlotte, NC, USA: Information Age Publishing.

von Mises, L. (1978). Epistemological Problems of Economics. New York, USA: New York University Press. (First published in German in 1933).

West, J. (2012). Ethics and Quantitative Finance, Griffith Business School, Australia. from Accessed 30 August 2018.

Wikipedia (2019). Bildung. Accessed 18 November 2019.

Zevenbergen, R. (1998). Language, mathematics and social disadvantage: a Bourdieuian analysis of cultural capital in mathematics education. Accessed 3 May 2015.

Arquivos adicionais



Como Citar

Ernest, P., & da Cruz (tradutora), D. B. (2021). Privilégio, poder e performatividade: a ética da matemática na sociedade e na educação. Pesquisa E Ensino, 2(2), e202103.