Maths helps us to:
- Deal with consistency
- It helps us to work strictly within relevant boundaries.
- provide calculation for other field of knowledge, since maths deals with basic calculation.
- Calculating physics, economics, shopping on Mall, buy T-Shirt, etc, follow rules on maths (can be provided by Maths).
Philosophizing mostly (not always) deals with:
- Premises and conclusions
- Maths can be used to provide consistent relational on reasoning.
- Any field of knowledge
- Maths can be used to provide consistent relational on reasoning from different point of view.
It helps us making an adjustment on different field of knowledge by providing premises from different point of view with consistent relational as proved (provided) by maths calculation.
Maths helps us to provide consistent argumentation.
Since maths can provide consistent argumentation, then it may help us to trust assertion better than previously. Furthermore maths will strongly force us to make an implementation of what we trust to achieve better possibilities for better life.
WEAKNESSES OF MATH
- Maths may be used to provide consistent argument with clear distinction as long as it deals with correct assertion (premise).
1.1. For example: stating there are two cats from me and two cats from you and it's equal there are four cats (whether several of them, alive or not)
But this could be wrong, if we say "sorry, five cats from me (not two cats) and two cats from you". But the final calculation still has consistent relational as the consequences, that "therefore there are seven cats".
1.2. When maths calculates wrong assertions on law of physics (for example past assertion on law of physics might be differ from current assertions), then it will make maths just as variables that gives inconsistency on the result.
- It's just analysis and far away from controlling our emotions directly, which mean that to be an expert on maths doesn't make someone a wise person. In philosophy, we need more than just analyzing or something we forgot.
For example, we know the benefit of meditation. It's scientific technique that will change our brain chemistry, further our emotions and the way we interact.
We may be using maths to calculate how meditation is valuable for us, by comparing calculation before and after meditation and providing exact argument that increases benefits on meditating exist. But maths won't help the situation that would excite us to practice meditation.
The points are:
A better philosopher is not just presenting argument, but how to make those arguments applicable to ourselves or others, and how to increase our abilities for better survival and better enjoyment. Placing ourselves without further development for better survival and better enjoyment, it's not part of philosopher, but strongly related to just theoretical.
Accuracy on maths depends on how accurate we perceive something
Therefore asking "Does a Background in Mathematics Make One a Better Philosopher?"
can be answered 'Yes' by supporting our argument with consistent relational*** & widening our chance to use argumentation from any field of knowledge (different point of view) without losing its consistency to widen our adjustment and hopefully increase our accuracy on perception (since formulated under maths rules), as long as:
We perceive differences better than previously.
We have an **open differences (and eventually increase our accuracy on reasoning using maths).
Maths must not just present strong argument to us, but it must help us to (increase our trust, excitement to) realise something for better survival and better enjoyment.
Without these, maths is just an analyzing tools without making any progress that is in line with the purpose of philosophy (love wisdom).