The other commenter is being a dick, though I do agree that a mathematics (or statistics) undergraduate degree with so little focus on proofs seems very strange to me. (Also, this might have been better suited to /r/learnmath or a similar subreddit.)

But anyway, you need to learn proofs, and the only way to do that is to read proofs and do proofs yourself. A couple of suggestions on how to do that:

- Read a book on proofs, like Velleman's *How to Prove It*. Google it for a (legal!) pdf. Do the exercises, and ask on e.g. /r/learnmath if there are things you don't understand. And be patient, proofs are difficult and can seem kind of dull at first. But it's a mindset you have to get used to.

- Study some proof-based undergrad-level maths. Since you're in statistics, you probably want to learn real analysis. A book like Abbott's *Understanding Analysis* is a good introduction to analysis. Study the proofs, do the exercises. And again, reach out if there are things you don't understand.


I find the fact you didn’t encounter much proofs to be quite strange like the other user. Anyway, these are some Introduction to Proof-writing books but they are at the level of a first year undergrad.

-Mathematical Proofs: A Transition to Advanced Mathematics Albert D. Polimeni, Gary Chartrand and Ping Zhang
-How to Prove It, Velleman
Mathematical Proofs:
-Book of Proof, Hammack (available for free on his website)
https://www.people.vcu.edu/~rhammack/BookOfProof/Main.pdf

If these books are too basic for you, ask yourself which subject you want to learn more about (for example Linear Algebra, Real Analysis, Abstract Algebra, etc.) and look for a proof based book on that specific subject. Real Analysis is a good option for someone interested into Statistics and Stephen Abbot’s Understanding Analysis, Terrence Tao’s Analysis I & II and Spivak’s Calculus are good options for that subject.

If your university offers you accounts that give you access to Springer, you might be able to down

Unfortunately, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

* Your post appears to be asking for help learning/understanding something mathematical. As such, you should post in the [*Quick Questions*](https://www.reddit.com/r/math/search?q=Quick+Questions+author%3Ainherentlyawesome&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) thread (which you can find on the front page) or /r/learnmath. This includes reference requests - also see our lists of recommended [books](https://www.reddit.com/r/math/wiki/faq#wiki_what_are_some_good_books_on_topic_x.3F) and [free online resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/8ewuzv/a_compilation_of_useful_free_online_math_resources/?st=jglhcquc&sh=d06672a6). [Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/7i9t5y/book_recommendation_thread/) is a more recent thread with book recommendations. 



If you have any questions, [please feel free to message the mods](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/math&message=https://www.reddit.com/r/m

a proof is just a chain of logical deductions

I took one linear algebra class. The rest of my degree was focused in frequentest statistics that was completely outdated when I came to a Bayesian university for my PhD. Otherwise, my undergrad did not offer half of the classes you listed, and I didn’t take any math class that required proofs. Even didn’t prove anything in a vector calculus course I took. I already knew my undergrad degree was trash but thanks for the boost in confidence.

if you have never written a proof then it's pretty hard to make the claim that you have a background in math. that's like saying you have a background in software engineering without ever having written a line of code. what was covered during all of those years? did they really not have a single class in real analysis, linear algebra, group theory, ring theory, topology, complex analysis, differential geometry, galois theory, functional analysis, ...?

I would suggest working through a real undergrad math curriculum.

also, read the sidebar before posting.

>**Rule 2: Questions should spark discussion**

>    If you're asking for help learning/understanding something mathematical, post in the Quick Questions thread or /r/learnmath. This includes reference requests - also see our list of free online resources and recommended books.

also, "proof" is a noun, "prove" is the verb. I have no idea why so many people seem to switch these two words only in the context of math.

Any sources on how to learn to proof?