>>12168903Because:
The teachers are spergs who won't tell you (or often even know) applications for what you're doing, or even the underlying theory from axioms up
It's highly abstract (which it doesn't need to be, purely, but, again, it's taught by spergs who make it autistically disconnected from the broader world)
It's taught with as little variety as possible (memey obsession with solving integrals and transformations in algebra, to the exclusion of all the other parts of math)
We're not taught what the open problems are, so it doesn't feel like something we can make progress in. It has no allure. The lack of teaching of applications makes this bad too, since we don't learn why pushing the frontiers in math is worth doing.
We're not taught proof
We're not taught mathematics as part of history, or as part of cultural history (niggas not be telling me that the Egyptians represented fractions in the same way as they laid they temples out, which is the same as a wadi coming off the Nile smdh)
We're not taught bits of math in the context of math as a whole
We're not taught the proof behind what we're doing
Mathematicians are fiends for abstraction, but teaching is only partly about abstraction. It's also about breaking things down and *then* building up to the abstracted stuff. Mathematicians, in my experience, almost always go too abstract and skip infinity steps. They also speed through their working, skipping too many steps (because to them it's obviously, and they're also spergs who can't empathise), to a room of uncomprehending undergrads.
Basically it's the hardest subject to teach that attracts the worst teachers. It's a real combo of a subject sculpted by autism and abstraction being taught by autistic abstractors to normalfags like myself who are interested in abstraction and autistic tunnels, but also like their own everyday experience, and everything in between. And who really need that as a hook.
