Mathematics is the most important subject.

I don't really understand your point about philosophy. I know nothing of the subject either. (Although my opinion of it is tarnished by the fact that no-one can tell be anything remotely interesting which philosophers have discovered)

Sorry; my point was that maths is a language (which be used to describe stuff) but as you said, the language can also be used to derive things as well, so I was conceding to your point that maths is more than a language. My point about philosophy was that just as maths can describe what can be derived by it's axioms, a human language can be used to describe what has been, deduced from the axioms of philosophy (although nobody is quite sure what these are or if they exist at all), so ther are some parallels between the two.

For example:

Premise 1: The word of Jesus is absolutely true and infallable
Premise 2: Jesus said that we should vote for the labour party

So from this we can deduce that we should vote for the labour party, although it's only as valid as the axioms so I guess a philosopher can act like a mathematician provided he accepts a system of axioms before using a human language to describe these deductions.

So yeaaah, I'm a bit **** at explaining things

Geography is hard to explain to somebody with a dismissive view of it, but I'll try. I think the best way to describe a Geographer is as a compiler - we seek to not only understand the same systems that other disciplines do (geology, ecology, sociology, etc.) but put them together logically and try to explain how and why these systems may be linked, and what changes that may cause in each system. The goal is not only to understand physical and human systems and phenomena as, say, physicists and sociologists might respectively, but to understand how they are linked and how they affect each other to whatever end.

Oh, and we also seek to place these systems and relationships in a spatial context. Sounds like bull****, I know, but no explanation of geography would be complete without a reference to "spatiality".

So if I'm getting this right: Philosophy might be like maths, and uses a branch of maths (logic) to say things.

Pretty much and use human language to express these things.

Although some philosophers now use symbols (¬ P(x) ∃ ∀ etc); I guess you could argue that maths is a branch of philosophy in that it is based on axioms, although it seems to be far more useful than many other areas of the the discipline.

Kurt Godel used mathematical symbols to prove the existence of God.

Maths is beyond amazing, although it was a tough degree that nearly destroyed me as a person.

How (I genuinely want to hear your answer I'm not be a dick)? I thought he proved that any system which can express truths about itself will always express a truth which cannot be proven.

Glad it only, "nearly" destroyed you

I'm going to do a masters, so maybe it'll finish me off. Heh. Can't live with maths, can't live without it.

Here is Godel's proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_ontological_proof

Oh, and you were referring to his Incompleteness Theorem. The dude came up with more than one theorem!

So if I'm getting this right: Philosophy might be like maths, and uses a branch of maths (logic) to say things.

Mathematics is sometimes used to describe logic, but does this mean that all logic is mathematics? I don't think so (meant in a curious and not offensive way).

I think of mathematics as our way of describing the symmetry (in a much more general sense than right triangles and group theory) we perceive in the world, which would make something like retrosynthetic analysis within organic chemistry very mathematical even though there's no numbers or equations as far as the eye can see.