/lit/ - Literature

>>19613070

>>19493064
Not him but if you ever want to dive into math in application (which will help w philosophy and other fields) try pr.
Proofs particularly are fun and helpful. They show you how to formally say and prove a lot of things (such as you might see in logical "fallacies" lists but in an actual logical and formal way so it directly helps you in reading and debates).

>>18943552

Does anyone know if this graph is bullshit of legit good information? Im looking into it

>>18351903
>>18351921
Oh maybe read a short history of math after/during reading philosophy of math books. If you understand metaphysics a bit you can get a good grasp on what mathematicians were doing historically.
Archimeded chose geometry, I think, as a foundation and refused to invent infintesimals for whichever reason he was ontologically against them. The issue came up again during/after the reformation where infintesimals were banned. If you like accepting a math discipline where particulars decide universals you may like it. So long as you find a good metaphysics you can dive into anything but trigonometry, linear algebra are good spots.
This chart gets shit but I've put it to good use. It accepts logic as a foundation and if you do then also this: https://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/, is a good study guide. It's written by a philosopher but it's mostly mathematical logic.

>>18104444

post some /lit/ related charts

>>17350751
Id start w logic first but have fun no matter what. It takes a lot of creativity to fill the intuitive gaps but it's extraordinarily rewarding

>>16990609
Those both are good. The left is more conversational and right is more mathematical

Is this chart any good or just a meme? I am finishing high school and going into STEM, which math lit will give me an edge?

I had a very poor mathematics education that i want to remedy. Can any math/STEMfags here tell me if this chart is actually good or a meme?

>>16755366
https://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/
And proofs https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics
Also it helps to translate some deductions into numbers to get a good idea of what's happening so picrel

>>16740441
bumping for math

>>16611809
You have many paths friend.
Picrel
Khan Academy
/sci/ sticky
Physicsforums

>>16497009
This helps https://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/
And so does the image.
Logic does take axioms but combining your metaphysics with it you can get a structure which leads to ontology.

>>16482313
This is good. He's a philosopher who specializes in logic so you have it more geared to philosophers and mathematicians. Linguistics has an intro in gamut but I'm sure you're not interested in that.
Michael Potter makes a set theory with categories or something and he's a philosopher but he's in the intro set theory section.
Tbh it's better to study logic and take your metaphysics into it and define it yourself. This chart an anon made and I'm following it and the aforementioned suggestion.

>>16416464

More like this please

Gimme the Borges chart (the funny one)

I finished a weird programme that had a lot of logic and little other math. I can tell that the first book here is great, can someone comment on the rest?

Like this maths one that I'm going to start.

>>15945485
Hope this helps.