I really didn't get on well with it for the most part, perhaps because many things never really seemed to be explained properly in terms of their reason for being or their usefulness. There seemed to be a lot of 'stop asking questions and memorize this formula' going on. The only parts that I genuinely liked and understood were statistics and some geometry, which, oddly enough, seemed to stump some of the other students who excelled at things like calculus.
I realize that for some people, maths is an awesome, inspiring subject and I'm not trying to flaunt my innumeracy here, but I don't get excited about it (I did read the New Yorker piece about Perelman recently, with interest). People who are really into maths, however, often don't seem to realize that other people's strengths and talents can lie elsewhere, as beautiful and meaningful as maths may seem to them. I'm more of a words person, and maths fans can often be poor communicators.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-09-21 04:43 pm (UTC)I realize that for some people, maths is an awesome, inspiring subject and I'm not trying to flaunt my innumeracy here, but I don't get excited about it (I did read the New Yorker piece about Perelman recently, with interest). People who are really into maths, however, often don't seem to realize that other people's strengths and talents can lie elsewhere, as beautiful and meaningful as maths may seem to them. I'm more of a words person, and maths fans can often be poor communicators.