I love mathematics - I enjoy the challenge of solving a difficult problem, performing a difficult computation, etc. However, in a sense I mind math, because I never have a feeling of rock-solid certainty; it is all-to-easy to misplace a decimal, leave out a step, miscarry a digit, etc. And, when doing mathematics, there isn't just one thing that can go wrong, but any number of them... That makes it very hard to check over your answer to make sure that it is correct (because you could still be wrong at any step) - and why I never have that solid feeling of certainty. Proofs are even harder for me for just this reason: how do you know that what you've demonstrated is correct, when you might have left out something out? This is why I'm instead drawn to other fields - like computer science and philosophy. When programming, there is no need to worry about leaving out a comma, because the compiler will catch any and all syntax errors. And, as input is always driven by output, you can almost always catch a run-time error by systematically testing your program. By the same token, one's philosophical abilities are determined by their ability to write. Therefore, in the same vein, one misplaced period or an inessential logic error will not ruin an essay the same way it ruins a mathematical computation. Therefore, I like philosophy for similar reasons. Nonetheless, when you eliminate the 'bookkeeping,' I thoroughly enjoy mathematics - and I can be very good as well. And, also, when you take math and put it purely into words (e.g., in economics), for some reason, I really understand. (This could be the 'crux' of the issue, for reasons I cannot pinpoint...)
Therefore, here is my question: what psychologically would cause this? What could be going on based on modern psychological models that would make it this way for me?