W
water
Guest
It is true that if you are good in Math, you may be able to study philosophy? This is my only third post in this forum, and I have never been introduced to this subject. It makes me nervous.
- Status
P
promethius
Guest
Yes and no. Proficiency at one does not necessarily denote proficiency in the other. Math and philosophy are, however, both based on logical progression of true statements. For example, If my argument is:
proposition 1) All dogs have hair
proposition 2) Sparky is a dog
Conclusion) Sparky has hair
These can be expressed mathematically as
∀ x: P(x)
S ∈ x
∴S ⇒ P(x)
Where statement 1 is P(x) which stands for “has hair” applies to x, which is “is a dog”.
Statement 2 is that S, or “sparky” falls within the set of x or “is a dog”
Statement three is the conclusion then, that S “sparky” therefore falls into the category of P(x) or “has hair”
If we changed our argument, however, to:
Statement 1) All dogs have hair
Statement 2) Sparky has hair
Conclusion) Sparky is a dog
Now our mathematical equation is different
∀ x: P(x)
S ∈ P(x)
However, the conclusion is undefinable because the first statement says that P(x) is true for all X, but NOT that if function P(x) is only true within the subset X. For example, P(x) may also be true for subset Y, cats, or subset Z, people, or subset Q, monkeys. (note: these “subsets” are arbitrarily named).
Simplifying the math:
First argument:
Statement one: all X = Y
Statement two: S = X
Conclusion: S = Y
Second argument:
Statement one: all X = Y
Statement two: S = Y
Conclusion: S = X (undefinable)
Hopefully you understand how in the second argument not ALL Y = x, though all x = Y, so the conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow.
This sort of mathematical breakdown, however, is generally more than you’ll go into for an intro philosophy class, and only succeeds in helping to breakdown and explain the logic behind philosophical argument, not the arguments themselves.
P
Padilla7921
Guest
I’m horrible at math, but rather decent at philosophy. I don’t know why, don’t ask me.
The thing is, math is simply logic using symbols. You can take any philosophy and make an equation out of it.
The thing is, math is simply logic using symbols. You can take any philosophy and make an equation out of it.
N
Namesake
Guest
That is very basic. There is much more as I hope you are aware of.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
Here is the official pecking order:
Physics is at the top.
If you aren’t smart enough for Physics, then try Math.
If you aren’t smart enough for Math, then try Computer Science.
If you aren’t smart enough for Computer Science, then go into Philosophy.
Physics is at the top.
If you aren’t smart enough for Physics, then try Math.
If you aren’t smart enough for Math, then try Computer Science.
If you aren’t smart enough for Computer Science, then go into Philosophy.
P
promethius
Guest
I’ve been through 400 level classes in philosophy. I was trying to keep it easy
P
promethius
Guest
SCORE! My degree was in physics.
sure makes for interesting discussions with atheists about the nature of religion. I love how the conversation always goes like this:“Christians ignore science and don’t respect the logical thought process behind it.”
“Really? I have a degree in Physics. What’s your degree in?”
“… uh… um… communications”
S
Sam_Maloney
Guest
Careful ya don’t dislocate your shoulder there, dude-- patting yourself on the back that hard can lead to injury.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
I don’t know where Medicine fits in on the list, so I’ll try to avoid that.
Also, I left out Engineering, which should be between Math and Computer Science on the list.
G
Ghoti
Guest
And if all else fails, there is always Politics.I don’t know where Medicine fits in on the list, so I’ll try to avoid that.
Also, I left out Engineering, which should be between Math and Computer Science on the list.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
don’t know about philosophy per se, but when I was getting my liberal arts education, a course in logic could be counted either as a philosophy or math requirement. Certainly one is going to be seriously hampered in either pursuit if one cannot argue logically and make a logical presentation of a theory.
C
cpayne
Guest
To the OP: No, you don’t have to be good at math to be good at philosophy. Some modern philosophy, however, is written in the kind of symbolic notation illustrated by a previous poster.
As for the “pecking order”: Theology is, of course, the Queen of Sciences, with philosophy following. Philosophy has gotten off course in America simply because educational systems have started stressing the “important” stuff to the exclusion of the Important.
(IMHO, of course. Also, I’m a philosophy teacher, so I naturally stick up for my discipline.)
As for the “pecking order”: Theology is, of course, the Queen of Sciences, with philosophy following. Philosophy has gotten off course in America simply because educational systems have started stressing the “important” stuff to the exclusion of the Important.
(IMHO, of course. Also, I’m a philosophy teacher, so I naturally stick up for my discipline.)
P
Psychotheosophy
Guest
I think math is more like a language, and learning it can be like learning a foreign language.
You can describe anything with it. Theology, philosophy, psychology, even music and art can be described with math.
However, I know some very wise people who understand some very deep concepts who are not very good in math.
You can describe anything with it. Theology, philosophy, psychology, even music and art can be described with math.
However, I know some very wise people who understand some very deep concepts who are not very good in math.
J
JonW
Guest
That’s funny. I was much better at Physics than Math, which is why I became a mathematician. Philosophy is every bit as difficult as any of your other options as well. It’s not a matter of how smart you are. Rather, it’s a matter of what your interests are, what motivates you, and how you want to build your brain. Now, does anyone wanna talk about some actual math in here?
God Bless
Jon
C
Chaldean_Rite
Guest
Math is the backing of Physics, so how can Physics be at the top? Geez.
e ^ ( square_root( -1) * pi ) + 1 = 0
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
“Biology is a much harder discipline than physics.”
- Nobel laureate physcist Irwin Scroedinger, in What Is Life?
G
Ghoti
Guest
I’d say Theology must be the hardest discipline, as the consequences of being wrong are most dire…
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Das ist falsch.
It is equal to e^i+pi + , a complex number. (A complex number is one that exists, but isn’t on the number line)
Used to be called “imaginary numbers”, but they are real enough to have useful applications.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Not God’s way. If getting it right was only accessible to the most brilliant, that wouldn’t be very fair, would it? The part that’s critical to salvation is understandable by all.
- Status