>> I will not be told I shouldn't teach what I love with all my heart -
>> no matter what 'Ivory Tower' it comes down from.
John Conway replied:
> I hope that this angry response wasn't the result of my contribution.
> In case it was, let me explain that I certainly don't regard myself
> as handing down dictates from on high to the lowly workers in the
> field.
> I won't enter any competitions involving the exact degree of passion
> I or others have for either mathematics or its history, but maybe if
> I did I'd have a good chance. I merely expressed my considered view
> that mathematical history was best taught inside courses on the
> mathematics it's about rather than in specialized courses on
> mathematical history only. I mentioned the fact that I'd taught such
> courses both in Cambridge and in Princeton by way of showing that I
> was qualified to have such an opinion, and that it applied to the
> students I'd had in both those places.
>
> I'll close with two remarks:
>
> 1) in my own teaching I ALWAYS include historical comments
>
> 2) there's no need for you to be so damned sensitive!
>
> John Conway
John, frankly speaking, and upon further review of my comments,
what you preceive as "angry" and "damned sensitive" is actually
frustration. For the outburst I apologize, but allow me a moment.
No one, unless they were anything less than sane, would dispute your
"degree of passion" for teaching history or your credentials. Your
reputation preceeds you.
My apologies to John.
L.A. McCreary-Lusk