On other online philosophy forums, this question got mixed responses. Some said that you could not get far in philosophy without a good background in mathematics. Others said that unless you venture into some areas of philosophy like philosophy of language, mathematics would not be that important. The remaining few adopted a more extreme position that philosophy could do without math.

I was wondering what Philosophy professors or people with and advanced degree in Philosophy think about this issue. Could you cite any peer-reviewed articles related to this question?

  • 3
    I think it depends hardly on your research interests. If you are interested in philosophy of mathematics and logic, then you are required to have sufficient background knowledges about them. However, if you are asking about the couseworks other than research then I think only basics of elementary formal logic would be enough to catch up with lectures. – Senna May 13 '17 at 9:00
  • I doubt if there exist formal articles related to the issue because philosophers are usually required to have diverse background knowledges and term "philosophy" is too general to discuss what is necessary for persuing them. However, it might be helpful to search syllabus in some renowned philosophy departments whether math or logic is important in studying the field you might be interested in – Senna May 13 '17 at 9:06
  • I don't have any peer reviewed journal articles to cite, but my sense (as a PhD older) is the same as "Others" but I would say you don't need advanced mathematics for philosophy of language. I've only ever seen that with philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of physics. – virmaior May 13 '17 at 10:34
  • 2
    Will you need to know anything about the algebraic geometry of projective spaces to do work in epistemology or ethics or philosophy of mind? No, of course not. Advanced mathematics is only going to be applicable to certain subsets of fields. Will you need to understand an undergraduate level of symbolic logic? Yes of course. Will you need to understand topics from mathematical logic, such as elementary set theory, elementary proof theory, elementary model theory and elementary recursion theory? It depends on what specifically you are doing. Phil of language? Yes. Phil of law or religion? No. – Not_Here May 13 '17 at 14:46
  • In undergraduate math classes (specifically ones for math majors that go above what any other major would need to take) the tools you learn that are applicable to philosophy are how to construct and understand proofs. It is not that you will need to understand topology to do work in philosophy of mind, its that the understanding of correct reasoning and formal (or informal) proofs of arguments that mathematical maturity comes with is exactly what contemporary philosophy is about. You can get those exact skills in an undergraduate logic class without the need of something like real analysis. – Not_Here May 13 '17 at 14:57

tl;dr- Philosophy departments don't tend to focus on math much, and Philosophy students have a mathematical proficiency much closer to an Art major's than to an Engineering major's. This answer doesn't comment on formal logic.

Lack of math in Philosophy departments

You normally don't need much math to do well in a Philosophy department's graduate program.

For evidence, we can look at standardized test scores to see what students going into different fields tend to be proficient in. In these GRE scores by discipline, we can see that students planning to do Philosophy in grad school rank only somewhat better in Quantitative Reasoning than other Arts and Humanities students, but much worse than Engineering, Physical Sciences, and Economics students.

You might be able to do math in a Philosophy department

I'm not aware of any hard rule stating that you can't do something math-related in a Philosophy grad program. For an example, "Historical Development of the BFGS Secant Method and Its Characterization Properties" (2009) by Joanna Papakonstantinou is a great read. The author published this as their dissertation for a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Rice University.

The caveat here is that their advisory committee doesn't list anyone from the Philosophy department, so presumably they worked with people from other fields. Presumably if you want to do something Math-related in a Philosophy department, you may have to reach out to advisors from others fields to support you, as the Philosophy department's professors are unlikely to have enough background knowledge to evaluate your work.

But if you want to do math, why in a Philosophy department?

Part of the lack of mathematics in Philosophy may just be a definition thing. This is, "philosophy" may be the general field of knowledge, but "Philosophy" in the sense of "what Philosophy departments focus on" is a far narrower topic.

If you want to do something like hardcore math, you can - just, you'd probably prefer a Math Ph.D. program, which is likely to give you a better background and a more valuable degree. You can even do a math-heavy Ph.D. in fields like Engineering, Physical Science, or Economics if you focus on advancing the understanding of a type of math that's relevant to those fields.

For example, you may not usually think of a Business department as a place where math's advanced, right? But Business departments are really interested in Big Data and data science. So, it shouldn't be too hard a sell to get a Ph.D. in some sort of Business-related field, then just spend your whole time doing math or data analysis, as long as you somehow refer it back to some sort of practical business interest. That's the beauty of grad school!

Addendum: Philosophy students scored well on the rest of the GRE

Above, I'd noted that Philosophy students didn't score very well on Quantitative Reasoning, as that's relevant to the question. Looking back at it, I wanted to note that this may belie an interesting tidbit...

Despite middling performance in Quantitative Reasoning, Philosophy students achieved the highest scores across all disciplines on the other two sections of the GRE, i.e. Verbal Reasoning and Analytical Writing.

  • not a bad answer imho. i would add though that preeminent philosophers really do have talent (it's not just hard work), and if you take the alternative view you should not be studying philosophy, for your own sake! – user25714 May 13 '17 at 5:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.