I've been studying undergraduate philosophy for the last two years. It seemed to me that philosophers could (and I suspect that many do) use mathematical methods, other than logic, to investigate some philosophical matters more efficiently. On that thought, I decided to pursue a double major in mathematics and philosophy, doing so involves completing a remedial elementary-algebra course during the summer.
Success in this course seems to involve quick and correct usage of the problem solving techniques taught in class. Accordingly, at the end of each class, the instructor assigns about 70 practice problems whose solutions involve correctly using one of the two to three methods taught in that class. Usually, I can easily solve all but a few of the problems. When I find problems that I can't solve, I contemplate why my thinking produced an incorrect solution, and adjust my understanding accordingly. However, the overall repetitiveness of the practice problems bores me so much that I often don't bother to solve all of them. I'd enjoy the homework more if it comprised questions like 'Using principles A, B, and C, prove and explain why method Y is the most efficient method of solving problems of form X' (which I do when I find a problem that I can't easily answer). Regardless, in order to study more math, I need to do well in this class, and doing well in the class involves doing well on the exams, which involves quickly and correctly using the problem solving techniques taught in class, and being able to do that involves a lot of repetitive problem solving, which I can't motivate myself to do.
It would motivate me to know that success in future math courses depends more on understanding principles and deducing their implications than on rote calculation. Is that the case?
How else could a person motivate themselves to do these problems?