IGWEBUIKE: African Journal of Arts and Humanities

This paper uses the everyday reality of our moral lives to question the idea that everything in the universe is ultimately mathematical. Advocates of mathematical monism most notably Roger Penrose argue that the world is built out of mathematics and that all genuine truths can, in principle, be expressed in mathematical form. However, our ethical experiences tell a different story. Moral decisions are not simply calculations; they involve emotions, values, context and an inner sense of “what ought to be done” that no equation can fully capture. Even the most sophisticated mathematical toolsutilitarian calculus, game theory, or decision models can describe how people behave, but they cannot explain why a person should act one way rather than another. This paper adopts analytic method to argue that the gap between describing behaviour and justifying moral obligation reveals a deeper limit in mathematical monism. Ethics operates in a space of meaning, responsibility and human concern that resists reduction to numbers or formulas. By taking ethical normativity seriously, we see that mathematics, while extraordinarily powerful, it is only one of the perspectives through which we understand the world. It cannot serve as a complete map of reality. The paper concludes by asserting that ethical experience provides compelling evidence that human understanding is richer and more plural than mathematical monism allows.

Open Full Text (PDF)