Advertisement

The Mathematical Intelligencer

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 22–27 | Cite as

Human activity: The soft underbelly of mathematics?

  • A. D. Gardiner
Article

Conclusion

Human activity and experience are an integral part of mathematics. They not only play a crucial role in the creative process of research but are also basic to the way human beings learn. I have suggested three lines of attack which would give students a better understanding of what mathematics is really about. First, we have to show them how (at least some of) the material they are studying originated and evolved into its present form through the combined efforts of generations of mathematicians. Second, we must encourage them to take an active part in their own learning, not just by practising routine exercises but by developing their own creative talents—thereby sharpening their insight into the way mathematics is created. Third, we have to find some way of relating higher mathematics to students’ previous experience. “The more abstract the truth is that you would teach, the more you have to seduce the senses to it” (F. Nietzsche,Beyond Good and Evil).

Keywords

Undergraduate Program High Mathematic Problem Orient Lecture Method Creative Talent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    F. J. Budden (1978)The Fascination of Groups. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. P. Burn (1982)A Pathway into Number Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. D. Dixon (1973)Problems in Group Theory. New York: DoverGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. M. Edwards (1977)Fermat’s Last Theorem: A Genetic Approach to Algebraic Number Theory. New York: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. J. Fletcher (1972)Linear Algebra Through Its Applications. London: Van Nostrand ReinholdMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Gaal (1973)Classical Galois Theory. New York: ChelseaMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Gardiner (1982)Infinite Processes: Background to Analysis. New York: SpringerCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Gardiner (1977) The Art of Doing Mathematics (manuscript)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. W. Han (1977) The Lecture Method in Mathematics: A Student’s View.Am. Math. Month.80:195–201Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Kline (1972)Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times. New York: Oxford University PressMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    I. Lakatos (1976)Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Lebesgue (1966)Measure and Integral. San Francisco: Holden-DayMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Lovasz (1979)Combinatorial Problems and Exercises. Amsterdam: North-HollandMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. E. Moise (1982)Introductory Problem Courses in Analysis and Topology. New York: SpringerCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. J. Newman (1982)A Problem Seminar. New York: SpringerCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Polya and G. Szego (1972)Problems and Theorems in Analysis, Vol. 1. Berlin: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Reid(1970)Hilbert. New York: SpringerCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Roberts (1977)Elementary Number Theory: A Problem Oriented Approach. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT PressMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. Thorn (1973) Modern mathematics: Does it exist? inDevelopments in Mathematical Education, A. G. Howson, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. D. Gardiner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations