i want to say that math just is logic (which, blown up into set theory, is the major way we understand language outside of full on anthropology and incidental history/statistics)... but my early allegiance to frege would be showing. alas, we are doomed to never find the logical foundation of mathematics--godel hits us on one side, wittgenstein on the other! at least frege was a better writer than either of those two.

anyway, i love the author's point (2). i would never argue that we don't need to bother wondering about the import of death or how we feel about things, but (2) not being widely known comes largely from A) people not studying philosophy, since B) they don't realize that philosophy isn't (always) about finding (capital M, almost-supernatural) Meaning, but rather is just being rigorous in your thought and language (as well as curious). math and programming aren't magic; they admit of rigorous thought just like anything else. you needn't be a savant, and you needn't go and vilify any particular normal human capacity or object of investigation to be allowed to not be a savant. sadly, i write like wittgenstein, not frege.

hope this rambling response struck you as topical enough.