TITLE: How do "proofs" work in mathematics, down to the basic level?
QUESTION [7 upvotes]: I came across this basic example of a problem:

Prove by mathematical induction that 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 6

What am I supposed to prove, the sum? I don't quite get it, so I decided to dig in to encyclopedia references for help:

In mathematics, a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement.

So a proof is just arguing that the "problem" to the equation is correct? Under what measures confines something as an argument of proof? Anyone can argue anything.
I ended up in axioms:

An axiom, or postulate, is a premise or starting point of reasoning.

So if I "reason and/or argue that my problem is correct" I am "proofing"?
Is that all that means?
So 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 6 = 21. Assuming you have elementary addition knowledge, and can add summands together, where is there an argument and why?
Basically, what is the point of "proof" in this situation, and how does the idea of "proofs" in math make its purpose worthwhile?
I mean I have a well open mind, but you can't realistically think everything has a purpose for everything at all times. I don't see any practical understanding or idea on "proofs" that makes me just "get it" and find it useful.

REPLY [8 votes]: A proof in mathematics is the same thing as a proof in every day life: it's an argument that convinces you that something is true. The only difference is that in mathematics we have much stricter standards for how convincing the proof should be.
Now then. Your initial confusion was about what this means:

Prove by mathematical induction that $1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 6$.

You were right to be confused, because that is a completely meaningless sentence. MJD's comment underneath your question does a good job at explaining the problem. I think we'd all appreciate if you could post exactly where you found that sentence, because I suspect either you misread or misunderstood it, or it was written by an idiot.
Now, if you were asked prove that $1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 6 = 21$, that's a different story (again, see MJD's comment if you don't understand the difference). As you said, you can prove that just by doing basic addition, and no reasonable person (even a mathematician) would ever ask for any further proof than that. Again, I suspect you must have misunderstood the original question (please post a link or a reference!).
You ask:

...if I "reason and/or argue that my problem is correct" I am "proofing"?

This sounds basically right, although your use of the word "problem" is strange. How can a problem be correct? A statement can be correct. You prove a statement. Like I said in the first paragraph, "proof" doesn't have any mysterious technical meaning in mathematics (except in super-advanced, Phd level logic classes), it's just that mathematicians are quite a bit stricter about how certain they want proofs to be.
Now, I don't quite understand what you mean when you say "you can't realistically think everything has a purpose for everything at all times", but what you seem to be asking is what the purpose of proofs is in mathematics. There are a few purposes:

The simplest reason is that although $1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 6 = 21$ is obvious, there are a lot of things in math that are far less obvious (but still true). If I just told you that the area of a circle is always equal to its perimeter times half the radius ($A=P\times\frac{r}{2}$), there's no reason why you ought to believe me. It doesn't seem all that obvious. But it's true, and you can prove it to be true.
Probably not so much at your level, but as you progress to higher mathematics, you more and more often come across things that seem true, but are actually false. So you start to trust your instinct a lot less, and proving things carefully becomes much more important.
A simple fact like $2+2=4$ is pretty obvious and not all that mysterious, but in higher mathematics many things just make you ask why?. Why is this fact true? A proof also acts as an explanation as to why something is true.