About a year ago I promised my friend Fischbein a preface to his book of
which I knew the French manuscript. Now with the printer's proofs under
my eyes I like the book even better than I did then, because of, and
influenced by, new experiences in the meantime, and fresh thoughts that
crossed my mind. Have I been influenced by what I remembered from the
manuscript? If so, it must have happened unconsciously. But of course,
what struck me in this work a year ago, struck a responsive chord in my
own mind. In the past, mathematics teaching theory has strongly been
influenced by a view on mathematics as a heap of concepts, and on
learning mathematics as concepts attainment. Mathematics teaching
practice has been jeopardised by this theoretical approach, which in its
most dangerous form expresses itself as a radical atomism. To concepts
attainment Fischbein opposes acquisition of intuitions. In my own
publications I avoided the word "intuition" because of the variety of
its meanings across languages. For some time I have used the term
"constitution of mathematical objects", which I think means the same as
Fischbein's "acquisition of intuitions" - indeed as I view it,
constituting a mental object precedes its conceptualising, and under
this viewpoint I tried to observe mathematical activities of young
children.