Live data from Hacker News

To Live Your Best Life, Do Mathematics

quantamagazine.org

241–243 of 243 posts

Re: To Live Your Best Life, Do Mathematics

#241
post #156

Interesting. Anyone have a recommendation on a Math app for everyday use?

The level of math amenable to apps isn't really what Su is talking about. I would suggest learning proofs, and maybe pick up some Art of Problem Solving books. Or perhaps working through the foundational curriculum of any decent math program (e.g., algebra, analysis, topology, number theory, etc.).

http://incredible.pm is perhaps relevant, albeit shallow and localized.

Re: To Live Your Best Life, Do Mathematics

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These traits you describe, you say they are a side effect of good reasoning skills. I agree that people who think more methodically are more susceptible to these traits, however, I think they are actually characteristic of a certain immaturity in one's reasoning abilities. To ask : "Why would anyone not do what's best if they know it is?", and to have no clue of an answer, would imply a lack of reasoning ability, rat…

> IQ becomes a justification for being detached and uncaring. I see your point. But I think some things are like a color you never saw and can't understand until you see it for the first time. In a sense, it's lack of maturity because it's a lack of experience. You can wait for the experience to reach them, or you can offer them to practice it. The second way is quicker and more reliable.

I agree. I don't think you can get past that stage without a few 'aha' moments that make you rethink things.

The mindset might be a bit of a trap because it can make you more isolated, which could then make those 'aha' moments less likely. In that position, you're right, waiting for it to fix itself won't be very effective so a more proactive approach sounds better.

Re: To Live Your Best Life, Do Mathematics

#243
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alas in philosophy you can't even be properly wrong.

Of course you can, given a set of axioms. Hey, what does that remind me of..

That whole approach would just make you an analytic philosopher. It wouldn't even work with so-called `continental philosophy'.
Post reply on HN