Reason starts primitively as the slave to the passions, and is then sophisticated so that it can be used for some very different purpose. Do maths likewise start primitively as slaves to the passions – possessiveness for example – and then become sophisticated for use in a quite different realm? Same with the idea of the father: a primitive god – rationalized, sophisticated and then used in the realm of reason? [see Paton, Categorical Imperative, pp. 188–196]. Mathematical statements seem to me (5 + 2 = 7) to be related to a belief that the mind cannot think otherwise until it is proved that it can. The moral judgements may be based on sensuous experience. Good = pleasurable. Evil = painful. Conversely, painful = morally evil. pleasurable = morally good. Then undergo sophistication. Why? To make them more generally applicable – to find the underlying group of which the several instances are only particular examples.