>>11608075It stretches credulity that the OP has a grandpa who constantly complains about Bourbaki of all subjects, but let's take the notion at face value and explain it a bit.
-Who were Bourbaki, and what did they do? Bourbaki were a group of (mostly) French mathematicians centered on the ENS in Paris, and they wanted to rewrite math from the bottom-up after WWI. They put out a bunch of textbooks, which had some success.
-As a result (and also because most members actually were world-class), they got arrogant as the years wore on, and the group declined. Like the other anon said, you can find this in the article.
-The big problem for most people is that they tried to "go from the general to the particular": to start in the most abstract terms possible (in the current state of mathematical research) and then get down to the concrete examples as an afterthought. There is actually a logic to this kind of presentation-idea but it's now how almost all humans go about learning things. You start with 2+2=4 and generalize to x + x = 2x, to speak crudely.
>>11608410It's a nice little historical essay which illustrates the power of generalizing in simple terms (elementary group examples), but it turns out that the structural stuff isn't what it's made out to be (category theory cumbrains inherit the earth, I'm only having a bit of fun here, take it easy it's just a prank bro)
