@sida1049 I think it depends on how you study MX2. If you learn 'how' but not much of 'why', then your logical reasoning abilities may not be truly tested/improved. I felt that MX2 improved problem solving skills, perseverance and creativity. Not sure about logical reasoning though, I struggled at the start but did not see my logic improve even though I did maths with logic. Step-by-step with reason or not proceed.
This area is quite cloudy for me.
Maybe we are talking about different logical reasoning perspectives... I think logic in mathematics is different to logic in social sciences. I have friends who are not mathematically inclined but smash the social sciences (eg. economics.) What do you think?
But for LAW, critical thinking is the main skill required
Oh yeah, I agree with you. Some of our top MX2 students focus on exam technique and not really the pure reasoning behind them. The most logically rigorous topics in the course, in my opinion, are probably inequalities, the uncommon complex number questions and a bit of the curve sketching topic (e.g. finding values of a constant which satisfies a certain condition). But for topics like conics and polynomials (despite people consider the latter as among the easiest topics, I've seen questions that I can't even make sense of to begin with), intuition and creativity are definitely key. While I agree that logic might only improve marginally, if at all, with MX2, at least students are exposed to it. And your mentioning of perseverance I think is an extraordinarily important aspect which extends
far beyond academia and one's career (in essence, it teaches one to hope).
As much as I love economics (or at least, what little I've been exposed to it) and appreciate some of the other social sciences, they barely have any mathematical reasoning. Mathematics deals with
certainty, where as social sciences pertain towards uncertainty and hence is non-committal in its core (e.g. the low modality language of "may", "should", "might", "perhaps"). I'd argue that economics and literary critiques/essays share an unmistakable similarity in that sense; inductive logic (i.e. the conclusion is
probable), much unlike the deductive logic that is prevalent throughout mathematics (i.e. the conclusion is
absolute). So you are definitely right: the social sciences, while logical, incorporates a different kind of logic to mathematical reasoning.
For law, aside from critical thinking, I'd say that one needs the ability to deal with bureaucracy in order to really succeed in law. The critical thinking is there, but I suspect that the vast majority of a career in law is bureaucracy. No subject can teach you how to deal with that (albeit the education system is a good simulation of bureaucracy; I'm still bitter about all the crap that I've lost in the system which I will never be handed back).
Coming back to the original topic, I think MX2 exposes students to the need for organisation, more so that EX2 at least. It takes up only 2 out of my 12 units and through out the year I'm sure I've spent about 40% of my precious time and effort on it [and there are some who exceed 50-60%], so it really does offer a much needed challenge for students to sharpen their self-management skills in preparation for the HSC, university, and beyond.
Fun stuff.
