8/3/2019 Maths is Better Than English

1/3

Maths is Better than EnglishAn essay you shouldnt want to read at all. Seriously.

To properly analyze the question of 'which is better, maths or English', we must first

understand the two terms, and what they refer to. English is the 'lingua franca' (pardon theirony) of this day and age. It refers to the complex language and its observed rules andexceptions - but it's also far more than that. What I may be so bold to refer to as a 'higherform', with more creativity and interest, is that which would perhaps more accurately bereferred to as 'literature, literary criticism, and original writing'. One can easily andimmediately see the change in focus and complexity by changing to this definition of'English' - it focuses far more on understanding of devices and methods, analysis of whatconstitutes and 'good' and 'bad' writing (and more importantly, what makes it so), and thatof original thought, the attempt to convey ideas, and do so in a way which the readerfinds pleasing. All of it, however, focuses on a single unifying point - that of thecommunication of an idea or concept, real or fiction, practical or abstract, which allows

the reader to gain an understanding of the subject, and in what I shall arrogantly refer toas 'some of the best pieces', the author.

Maths is an altogether different item. Though its practical uses in every day life aremanifold, it is generally considered to be more abstract, theoretical, removed. Behind theworkings of every item if we dig deep enough, our body is built on ratios, all objectsinteract in a way we predict through maths, even what we find pleasing to hear in bothmusic and language can find a basis in pure mathematics. The wonder of its applicationwould be little, though, if everything was in simple ratios, easy to see. The complexitiesinherent to literature are obvious, with large numbers of progressively more complex andeven simpler, unifying ideas; its sheer level of subjectivity makes any attempt to belittle

its strength of offering for interesting discussion border on the absurd. I would, however,argue that it is precisely the same, if not greater, in mathematics. Anything can be used,proofs constructed in a practically infinite different number of ways. The contest is tofind which is the best, most beautiful proof; the desire to find the most simple, elegantmethod. Not only is maths equally complex to language - and in many ways, far morecomplex - I would here conjecture that its beauty is all the more apparent by its method.While literature reaches to deeper and deeper levels of analysis, becoming more complexfor the understanding of complexity, always trying to find the most complex parts of thework, maths is the opposite. One certainly wouldn't deny that huge levels of depth aremade to understand simple concepts, such as the over 100 page proof for why one plusone is equal to two; but its goal is not the complexity, but rather, the simplicity. The end

goal of maths is always to find the simpler, more elegant method - to take that absolutelymost complex of equations and reveal the underlying structure. Its tools are equallyversatile to the job - while English offers the devices and concepts, different forms ofunderstanding, and similes to understand, maths goes from Graham's Number toimaginary parts, all with different rules and laws as a guide.

Before I continue, I would like to clarify one point - the 'maths' in school is not, nor willit be, what I refer to in this essay. Just as in early English classes very little true analysis

8/3/2019 Maths is Better Than English

2/3

and creative writing is done, it is relatively rare in maths classes below a college level totruly delve into the beauty of the proof, the complex analysis which is what truly makesmaths amazing. In the end, it rarely is more than the learning of different rules, and howto apply them to solve basic problems. As the quip goes, 'there's only 3 problems perchapter in a maths textbook', because all of the rest are simply the same concept repeated

ad nauseum. Maths, though, I'll argue, is as much restricted to only being laws and ideasone memorizes and English is restricted to being only a collection of terms and rules forgrammar, where the basic numerical mistakes common in maths is equivalent to themisspelled word. To put it simply, maths is by far a separate entity from monotonouscalculation and memorization of laws - its beauty is in finding the new thing in every newproblem examined.

One will have to forgive me, because I've gone quite off track, starting to compare andcontrast the ideas of maths and English well before I'd intended. The rest of thatcomparison, however, I will attempt to keep here. 'Purity' is a concept which trulydeserves some debate. Maths is the one subject which can truly always leave universal

truths, things which are known beyond the even amazingly reliable constraints ofempiricism. (It should be noted that math is influenced by people - different ways thingsare developed, different philosophies shown.) The one thing we can truly be sure of, andit is also the basis for the entire universe. It is the ruling factor (pardon the pun) in all therules of physics to biology, and even controls language. English, conversely, has no truehold on maths. Maths is in no way dependent on it, and it never will be, by the very wayit's defined. English (or rather, 'language') does hold one great benefit - thecommunication of ideas, without which, there is no way for maths to be spread fromperson to person, despite its continued existence. But which is more important? That ofthe understanding of all of nature, or the communication of person to person? I wouldargue that the former is more interesting, but in the end, that decision is subjective. Icould endlessly justify the plethora of different maths things that could be done, andargue the simplicity of English, but the latter at least would start to go beyond hyperbole,and into purest fiction. Only the reader can truly decide which they find more interesting- the universal truths striving for simplicity, or the always subjective, changing, morphing'laws' of English, always striving to just conceal the true meaning under an engagingstory, for the reader to then discover. In the immortal words of Dirac, 'In science youwant to say something that nobody knew before, in words which everyone canunderstand. In poetry you are bound to say... something that everybody knows already inwords that nobody can understand.' But of course, that comes from someone alreadybound for maths and science over language.

Beauty. Beauty is a concept that I will argue to be as important to this debate as anyother. From the mesmerizing lines of Victor Hugo, to the awe inspiringly simple proofsfor basic arguments like Stuart's theorem, both subjects have their claims. Again, that ofEnglish is obvious, and that of maths tends to be hidden to the lay observer, only foundby the actual search which isn't shown in the concept, but both are beautiful. Maths'beauty even extends to its definitions, such as the lines of gravity it defines, famouslypainted by Feynman, or the 'perfect' features of 1:1.6180339887.... Here, the defender ofEnglish may well object. Aha! But the maths is not the beautiful thing. The ideas you

8/3/2019 Maths is Better Than English

3/3

claim to be 'beautiful' are 'wonderous', but not 'beautiful'. Perhaps. It's debateable. Theydon't have the ostentatious beauty language can hold, but wonder in ideas of beauty thatcan only be expressed in maths is so similar, that I will say the distinction is pointless.Past a certain point, only a term such as 'beauty' can properly express what we see inmaths. A noble defense, one could argue, but there is no indication that maths is superior!

All given is defense. So how could you say that one is more beautiful than the other? Agood question. I can't. Nor can anyone else. Beauty is subjective. Beauty in language andliterary ideas is so different from the 'wonder' of maths and its own peculiar ideas, that noone could truly argue that one is greater than the other without assuming a large numberof biased criteria, which presuppose the question. I find myself more attracted to thebeauty of the mathematical idea than the beauty of the hidden messages and prose of abook.

Critical thought. I've heard both groups claim it for their own, and both with some reason.The ever present attempt in annotations and literary criticism is to understand thenarrative. They examine symbolism and ideas, metaphors and microcosms, all to

understand the literature, and what it's trying to say - or not say. Maths is very different.It's practically defined by critical thinking. Critical thinking here is about the problem, theway of finding the solution, achieving the goal - or indeed, something far moreinteresting than the goal. The main difference, perhaps, is the subjectivity of English. It'salways a debated on whether it truly means something. Its critical thought is the endresult. Maths uses its critical thought almost as a means to an end, where as often as not,the means is far more impressive then what it was actually done to accomplish. For thisreason, it tends to be more objective in its final results, though not always. Here is, in myopinion, where maths makes its mark. English ends up being critical thought for criticalthought's sake. Maths uses it as a tool, a tool which becomes more powerful with eachuse because of its self expanding nature. It constantly tries to find new methods,something which literature doesn't work nearly as well for. Again, the proponent ofEnglish can easily explain away the difference, arguing there's to be greater. However, I,at least, find this to be the point which defines maths as superior to English. The extracritical thought the way it works, and the way it expands and turns in on itself is trulywondrous.

Conclusion: Maths is exy.