# Learning Math & Science from the Classics



## Davidius (Mar 8, 2008)

Since my public secondary education was worthless, I'd like to retrace my steps and study subjects such as Algebra, Geometry, Logic, and Physics on my own. Has anyone ever used the classic sources for this, i.e. Euclid's _Elements_, Aristotle's _Prior and Posterior Analytics_, Newton's _Principia_, etc? Would it be intellectually rewarding to go this route or would it be better to just buy modern textbooks?


----------



## kvanlaan (Mar 8, 2008)

I highly recommend _Principia Mathematica_, but only in the original Latin (otherwise, it's just too easy).


----------



## jaybird0827 (Mar 8, 2008)

I'm not sure what you mean by classic.

We used Saxon Publishers when we homeschooled our son. I am an experienced math teacher who would have given anything to have had an early-edition Saxon text when I was in that profession.

My recommendation is you go through the following:
Algebra 2
Advanced Mathematics
Calculus with Trigonometry and Analytic Geometry

If you can find an edition that is no later than 2000, that would be great, because they sold Saxon Publishers to a "respectible" textbook publisher and it's been watered down to make it acceptable to the public schools. Otherwise they might learn something.

WARNING: If you do it right, it's time-consuming. I would expect to take a year or more to go through those three.

BENEFIT: You will learn the skills over a long period of time and you're less likely to forget what you've learned.

ALTERNATIVE: You could look into Singapore Math. I don't know much about what is offered at that level.


----------



## Davidius (Mar 8, 2008)

By "Classic," I mean the original works in which these disciplines were first developed.


----------



## cih1355 (Mar 8, 2008)

I think that it would be intellectually rewarding to study math and science by reading the classics. You would get firsthand information. When I took physics in college, I noticed that the ideas of my physics textbook came from Newton, Pascal, Bernoulli, Torricelli, Archimedes, Robert Boyle, Niels Bohr, Faraday, Einstein, and so on.


----------



## JBaldwin (Mar 8, 2008)

jaybird0827 said:


> ALTERNATIVE: You could look into Singapore Math. I don't know much about what is offered at that level.



I have been teaching my children from Singapore Math for the last several years, and I abandoned Saxon for the reasons you gave. 

I have not looked closely at the upper levels of Sinagpore Math, but many complain they are not good. However, most of these folks have not used Singapore at the lower levels. Singapore Math requires a completely different mindset. When we switched to it, it took me a year or more to get comfortable with it.

Singapore Math teaches Algebraic thinking and the most foundational geometry proofs in the upper elementary books. They assume you have grasped these basic concepts when you start doing algebra and geometry. 

Another recommendation which is very new is this: Teaching Textbooks

Nearly everyone I've spoken to who has used Saxon for years has switched to this for upper level math and has been very happy with it. It is geared toward learning the math thoroughly and on your own.


----------



## jaybird0827 (Mar 8, 2008)

JBaldwin said:


> I have been teaching my children from Singapore Math for the last several years, and I abandoned Saxon for the reasons you gave.
> 
> I have not looked closely at the upper levels of Sinagpore Math, but many complain they are not good. However, most of these folks have not used Singapore at the lower levels. Singapore Math requires a completely different mindset. When we switched to it, it took me a year or more to get comfortable with it.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for this info. Actually when we were homeschooling our son we had him in A Beka through 6. We took from A Beka 7 and 8 what he would miss in Saxon. Then we did all the Saxon from Algebra 1/2 through Calculus, and he did very well. 

I thought that Saxon's strengths were in the upper level beginning in Algebra 1/2. I was disappointed especially in Math 67 because it seemed very watered-down.

I think the Teaching Textbooks looks like a great alternative! The explanations seem more student-oriented and the exercise sets much more manageable. They preserve what I thought was the most valuable aspect of Saxon: continual review.

Thanks again!


----------



## jaybird0827 (Mar 8, 2008)

jaybird0827 said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by classic.
> 
> We used Saxon Publishers when we homeschooled our son. I am an experienced math teacher who would have given anything to have had an early-edition Saxon text when I was in that profession.
> 
> ...


 
Considering JBaldwin's input and having looked at the product online, I have to conclude that Teaching Textbooks might be an even better alternative to Saxon. The Saxon Calculus might be a good intro calculus after you did the pre-calc.

All this is based on the assumption that your original question had to do with reviewing or re-learning math *skills and concepts*.


----------

