/lit/ - Literature

>>16988165
I'm too much of a brainlet for maths.

>>16988165
Poop

Mathematics isn't philosophy and not everyone cares about formal logic(actual mathematicians certainly don't).

Name three (3) things math has contributed to philosophy. You can't. If anything, you will take some philosophical concept and show how mathematics bastardized it.

OP is a fag

>>16988498
A lot of mathematicians were working on logic and the foundations of math in the early 20th century but then it didn't go anywhere and Godel proved mathematics couldn't be grounded on a single axiomatic system so everyone gave and they even stopped teaching logic to mathematics undergrads.

>>16988498
Fregean logic.
That alone is way more than three things.

Maybe 2/3 of humanitiesfags are only in the Humanities due to a near pathological fear of maths.

>>16988519
>but then it didn't go anywhere
Are you out of your mind? It didn't go where people expected it to go, but we reached a conclusion, a truth.

"Mathematics"? More like: "mediumaddicts".

>>16988165
I literally can't do math. I needed help to pass my college algebra class. For some reason I can still read and understand most philosophy tho.

>>16988536
What is it about math that they fear?

I only went as far as pre calc. Can you just use things like Kahn academy to teach yourself calculus?

>>16988536
It's foolish to pursue things you don't have a natural talent for. As GH Hardy once said, it's better to be a talented cricket player than a mediocre mathematician.

>>16988165
You’re right, Plato said let noener who hasn’t mastered geometry, etc.
But this is what the frogs call a red pill.
Maybe black pill.

you need to be actually smart to do math. that's why so few people do it

>>16988753
Do Lang's basic mathematics then use Apostol to learn calculus.

>>16988763
*no one enter

>>16988525
not math

>>16988165
I asked myself that a year ago, so I've been studying probability, topology, and networks since then.

>>16988772
And after that?

>>16988761
Extremely fucking moronic philosophy student argument. This is not how the world works at all.

I'm bad at math.

>>16989900
Here is the rest of the guide
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics

>>16989014
No, but it takes most of its bases from math.

>>16988165
Ive been thinking about studying Linear Algebra. Farthest I've gone is Calc 1. I was okay at it, with hours studying. I'm not sure what benefit I'd get from it. Programming a lot in college, helped me more. Now, I just work a wagecuck job, I read, write, and workout. I wanna get into phil, don't think I'd have time for math.

>>16989925
This was said by one of the last century's best mathematicians and the man who discovered Ramanujan. He also thought having a real talent for a single subject was ridiculously rare, only happening with one in a million cases, so you shouldn't waste it.

>don't do it
t. pascal

>math starts with definitions, philosophy ends with definitions
t. rota

>>16988165
mathematics only gives quantitative knowledge not qualitative knowledge

>>16988165
Bro didn't you hear? Godel btfo'd math

>>16988165
Not everything is for everyone. Math is boring. if someone can tell me something about it and I learn from it then I'll be happy but if I'm bored then it probably has no use to me.

>>16988191
/thread, also my case

I’ve studied logic at uni.
Recommend everyone try out Haskell for the Greater Good. It’s a follow along programming book but it’s like an intro for functional programming.
Haskell is based on lambda calculus, which is pretty fun to follow along. I still don’t understand it but I liked that rabbit hole.
Set theory is also easy to get into just to get a grasp of some math in philosophy.

Anyone recommend intro set theory books for non mathematicians? I’m always interested in learning more.

>>16988519
Godel gave us computability theory which gave us computers. Computability is studied to this day necessarily.

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

>>16990601
>pure logic is boring to me
Typical normie

>>16988536
This is definitely true. Most people think they're bad at math but really they just lack the discipline to learn. That's why they go for easy useless degrees.

>>16988761
>natural talent
This is what weak willed people tell themselves to cope with being a undisciplined mediocre human.

>>16990618
Thanks for the guide

>>16990666
>Typical normie
You don't want typical normies doing math with you do ya, Satan?

>>16990684
He was a literal genius you retard. It's arrogant and misinformed to think anyone can be the next Ramanujan if they would just apply themselves, the truth is most people are completely unremarkable and will make no impact on whatever field they choose to pursue. Thinking otherwise is a midwit cope.

>>16990618
>>16990697
It's a great way to waste your time.

>>16988165
It doesn't tell me anything

>>16990738
>It's arrogant and misinformed to think anyone can be the next Ramanujan if they would just apply themselves
You don't have to be Ramanujan to understand the math he did. By your argument, you should never study philosophy hecause you will never be as good as <insert your favorite philosopher here>.

>>16991536
The argument is actually that it doesn't matter for most people what they end up doing because they weren't born with a talent for anything in particular, so they should just do whatever they like since they'll likely be mediocre at everything.

>>16988165
Pure mathematics is pseudry if you're not doing it to make breakthroughs and for applied sciences.

>>16991548
Not a single mathematician gives a shit about applications and their findings still find uses in engineering and physics decades later.

>>16988165
>How can someone in good faith say they care about philosophy but spend no time studying mathematics?
Most mathematical discoveries have no bearing on philosophy, the only mathematics you need for philosophy is logic and set theory with emphasis on real numbers

>>16990354
Underrated post

>>16991546
>since they'll likely be mediocre at everything.
Most people are at best mediocre at anything, so they should do whatever they want.

>>16991574
That's exactly what i said

Comfy advances lately are frankly staggering, dungeon synth e.g.
Today my beautiful math prof (on video) mentioned Descartes being struck by lightning in a dream—thus the creation of analytic geometry.
Seems you knew this.
You’re always talking about your comfy dreams.
I must claim nighttime or whenever beddy bye time is as part of my Comfy Empire.

>>16988492
fr fr

>>16988165
I studied applied math and finance in college and got into philosophy after I graduated and started working, I wouldn't say it helped me better understand what I have been reading but I think it helps me appreciate it more.

>>16988165
I was always bad at math and it bores me, philosophy doesnt so I would rather spend my time reading it instead of forcing myself into something I don't care
Care to explain why should I do it?

>>16988165
No one can.

Advanced math is basicly just mathematicians circle jerking. Group theory and topology have no real uses and barely any basis in reality. Calculus is alright, everything afterwards is useless bullshit.

>>16988498
Proof of the irrationality of sqrt(2) sent the Pythagorean school of thought into existential coma.
Gödel and Tarksi's theorems on incompleteness and undefinability (respectively) showed the limit of the logical positivist project.
Fitch's paradox of knowability put a serious blow to verifiationism.
Gödel gave a formalizaton of Anselm's ontological proof of the existence of God within the framework of modal logic, thus showing that the internal logic of the proof wasn't quite as shoddy as often made out to be.
Set theory in general contributed to refining he access problem (also called the problem of Plato) about the tension between epistemology and ontology.
Chaos theory (dynamic system theory in mathematics) proved that intractable behavior can appear in relatively simple, deterministic dynamic systems, thus challenging the notion that deterministic processes are well-behaved.


>If anything, you will take some philosophical concept and show how mathematics bastardized it.
More like the opposite, see how often philosophers misuse Gödel.

>>16988761
He also said most people will never have the capacity to be either.
I like Hardy but reading A Mathematician's Apology made me understand how much he was a sheltered academic prodigy with little understanding of what people do outside of his circle. His essay is perceptive when it comes to mathematics (even very simple mathematics) but he clearly comes from a place of obsession with achievement.

>>16990354
Always love to see that one.

>>16995572
>He also said most people will never have the capacity to be either.
He isn't wrong though.

>>16995565
Those in math can only comment on philosophy, they can't affirm or deny it they can simply imply a positive or negative correlation. Starting from philosophy you can check actual causation because its foundational to math. Sorta like physics can't contradict math but just affirm where they see a particular math operational in the material world and where they cannot.

>>16990595
Not really. The notion of "open" or "closed" or "neighborhood" or "border" are all qualitative and they can be given a precise meaning within mathematics. A lot of mathematicians used to not concern themselves so much with explicit quantitative work.

I have a degree in mathematics
>>16995512
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>16988165
There are many angry brainlets with an incredible tolerance for tedium who are, whole totally incapable of comprehending advanced math, able to convince themselves that math is "below" them. It really is incredible how thoroughly a man can delude himself.

>>16995611
It is derivative of philosophy but I think what's lends math to denigration is the absolute shitshow it is in its disparate formulas/subjects/interpretations.

>>16995633
I'm unfamiliar with advanced math and academic math departments, but even what you are describing sounds less pathetic than what philosophy has become.

I dispute the idea that math came from philosophy. I realize that Hellenistic and other philosophers figured out incredible things with math and physics, but after that philosophy has turned into something completely different. The should be a different term for what we call "philosophy" now to add clarity. Maybe we could call it "talentless fucking retards fighting for professorships in bullshitting"

>>16995512
>Group theory and topology have no real uses and barely any basis in reality
Both are key to general systems theory and complexity science, and they have abundant real-world applications

>>16988165
I agree.

This is why I just enrolled in a master's degree in Logics, Philosophy and History of Science. Mostly going to skip the last part and just take courses in Logics and Philosophy, there's some cool stuff like Advanced Topics in Philosophy of Mind, Logics and Quantum Computation, and Applied Logics.

Wish me luck anons.

>>16995769
I agree that philosophy is more pathetic academically. It's just politics w obligatory coherent particular ethic problems to fund their law schools. It's embarrassing certainly and I've talked over phd students in philosophy of x multiple times (two that I can remember rn w one almost accusing me of being a colleague even tho I've never been to college).

Philosophy in a real sense, and not sociological, is the dictation of what a number is. I would say I believe base numbers are started through interpretations of what numbers are (either base 2 in 1 or more, in base 5/10/20 in fingers/toes, base 60 in astronomy for farming purposes like Sumerians). It clearly goes deeper in that (mayans and Hindus invented 0 but Egyptians/sumerians/greeks didn't while fractions were unknown to mayans who subsequently never developed smelting which may have required that). Usually the philosophical background is taken care of in their religion primordially. I think it would require more work to explain math's foundations outside philosophical considerations.

>>16995795
Have you checked this out? Very good guide w many alternatives https://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/
What's your undergrad if I can ask?

>>16995851
>https://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/
Hey, thank you. I already have studied logic in my undergrad but additional stuff is always good to have.

My undergrad was in Philosophy. I mostly took courses in stuff that interests me (philosophy of science, logics, cognitive philosophy), and I was really undecided whether to take Cognitive Sciences or the one I'm taking now as a masters' degree.

The university with the Logics Philosophy and History of Science ended up offering me a tuition and a special curriculum for excellent students, so that sealed the deal.

>>16988186
yep.

>>16995512
>barely any basis in reality
You have a very narrow view on reality.

>>16995870
Are you at studying in Munich?

>>16995920
Nope, but still in Europe.

>>16995512
>group theory
Useful in cryptography, astronomy, cosmology, quantum mechanics. Cryptography underlies most of the modern information security system.

>topology
Used prominently in the modern theory of dynamic systems without which the current precision on weather forecast wouldn't be possible (remember when they joke weather report never gets the weather right? that was 40 years ago, now it's pretty reliable up to 3-4 easily). It's also increasingly in cryptography to replace the old systems that some fear will sonn get outdated.
Topology also has surprising applications in data analysis and neurology. A team using topogical algebra tools combined with statistics managed to detect the existence of a benign form of breast cancer that was previsouly detect as a malign form. This has saved thousand of women from having to undergo a painful and costly treatment procedure for a harmless cancer.

Topology is also more and more used in material physics and the study of quasiparticles.

Point is, you can never tell in advance what a mathematical tool will be used for.

>>16995870
Yeah what level in curriculum would you say that goes up to?

>>16995841
Well, you've got a big brain, so I think your decision to stay out of academia was justified, lol.

I'm the kind of person who tested very high on the verbal SAT but mediocre on the math section. I'm constantly impressed with STEM people and try not to abuse them with my bullshitting skills. Verbal intelligence is in oversupply

>>16988165
I'm too much of a brainlet for any math higher than AB calculus.

>>16995963
The course I did in my undergrad?

It was pretty good honestly. We did set theory, basic FOL (including stuff like the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem), Godel’s incompleteness theorems, modal and intuitionist logic, some basic second order logics and Kripke's worlds

>>16995980
Yeah I have high verbal but quantitative is highest. Best thing about verbal is you can be a sort of white hacker but in terms of rhetoric w it.
Everyone should go into math tho after philosophy because it's a perfect place to check if your metaphysics is bs or not and how to fix it.

>>16988191
It's the opposite. Math is for brainless. Watch Ken Wheeler on metaphysics.

>>16995587
>Those in math can only comment on philosophy, they can't affirm or deny it they can simply imply a positive or negative correlation

Several mathematicians were also philosophers (Pythagoras, Descartes, Pascal, Leibniz, Frege, Tarski, Kripke...). What are you on about correlation? Completely out of place here.

>Starting from philosophy you can check actual causation because its foundational to math.
There is very little to no causation in maths. Causation is not the same thing as implication.

>>16996003
like that. Do you have a favorite set of philosophers or school of thought? I'm instinctively against philosophy including metaphysics in general, but want to be convinced otherwise

>>16995997
Okay yeah that goes past it. I'm about where you're at but I'm still in just skimming computability phase. It took me a couple months to figure out what completeness was doing. I read 5 or 6 fol books to some good distance and some of those multiple times. Jesus was it annoying but ig I came in expecting so much different stuff because it's so formal and not platonist at all. And exactly what truth preservation meant in terms outside logic was a bit confusing at first. I liked trees a lot at first as a proof system but then in practice you can't really screw with it like other proof systems so I had to drop it.

>>16995633
>It is derivative of philosophy
Not really, maths goes back to the invention of writing pretty much. Predates philosophy by 2000 years.

>>16995993
Are you saying that as someone who tried and failed to grasp it, or as someone who never even tried and just gave up?

>>16996025
Well you seem to a gem. I didn't say you couldn't be a philosopher and mathematician my other posts said as much.
Correlation is just to imply existence preservation. Math can only say whether a metaphysics is applicable in a certain domain of math or not. You can't use 1+1=2 to criticize dualisms, for example.

>>16996029
Yeah my metaphysics is heavily influenced by parmenides and Plato and augustine. I have a logic but I'm finishing applying it to math. I'm pretty close to being done w it (and its only been a week or two).
A metaphysics is just a framework of how you think the universe works. Anytime you make any assertion its downstream from your metaphysics so if you work on that then other things become easier. It's like learning arithmetic to learn algebra. Without a firm ground in arithmetic, learning algebra, trig, calc is just too disparate.

>>16996035
Wrote here
>>16995841

>>16996067
I must be misunderstanding metaphysics then. I'm seeing it used to defend a lot of stances that are based on a bias towards Christian faith. I'm not particularly against religion or Christianity but to me it seems dishonest. I'll look into the older stuff

>>16995997
Nice curriculum, I only studied mathematical logic for an elective in my masters, and what we covered is what you describe up until godel's theorems included. Was a pretty short course though.
What do you think of Gentzen and natural deducation, sequent calculus, cut elimination? Did you ever look into lambda calculus or homotopy type theory?