Preliminary complaint: Anything that can be "transferred to" from mathematics becomes mathematics, thereby removing it from contention. I think this take would

Preliminary complaint: Anything that can be "transferred to" from mathematics becomes mathematics, thereby removing it from contention. I think this take would have benefit from some mathematical experience. Mathematicians are mainly adept at discarding their beliefs. The rule of consistency, ie that my beliefs should not allow me to reach contradictions, is slippery to apply, and generally requires a lot of practice. Practice that is by far most easily obtained through a formal math curriculum, where it is least difficult to overcome the first hurdle of getting someone to agree that this rule exists in the first place, and the second hurdle of convincing someone that the contradiction does in fact follow from the assumptions. There is a lot of finesse involved, and that finesse comes with experience. In the real world, people assume things without proof, and this makes the ability to heuristically generate counterexamples on the fly much more important. All of my argument of course depends upon a world in which mathematics is actually the thing being taught, rather than whatever grotesque projection of it children are shown in school, but let's not pretend that that projection bears any resemblance to mathematics.