reason for delaying its study has to do with the question of mathematical maturity. * No use is made here of trigonometric, logarithmic, or expo nential functions except in occasional optional material indicating how such functions can be handled. A perceptive remark made by George P6lya suggests how we can simultaneously learn mathematics and learn "about" mathematics-i.e., about the nature of mathematics and how it is If the learning of mathematics reflects to any degree the invention of mathematics, it must have a place for guessing, for plausible inference. The reader will find plenty of opportunity here for guessing. The early chapters go at a gentle pace and invite the reader to enter into the spirit of the investigation. Exercises asking the reader to "make a guess" should be taken in this spirit-as simply an invitation to speculate about what is the likely truth in a given situation without feeling any pressure to guess "correctly". Readers will soon realize that a matter about which they are asked to guess will likely be a topic of serious discussion later on.
I never would have passed Calculus in college if I hadn't first discovered this old textbook on my mother's shelf. The explanations and exercises are clear, yes. More significantly, the author's perspective on math as a type of language that a "liberal arts brain" can learn to speak. This idea will appear revelatory to people like me who grew up thinking that these types of the thinking were not only clearly distinct from one another but also opposed to one another in drastic, inalterable ways. Who does this so-called distinction serve, I wonder? At ant rate, this text is old and probably out of print. I'm taking the time to write a review out of gratitude to the author and shout-out to the idea that anyone can learn calculus when taught without prejudice. Readers who'd like a history of math written with the same open frame of mind should find a copy of "Mathematics for the Million" by Lancelot Hogben. Even Albert Einstein and HG Wells liked it.