[theoh]

This comment is like a red rag to a bull for me, because why wouldn't some artists want a basic grasp of calculus?

Bear in mind that a secondary education, for most people, involves learning the basics of calculus. You might be thinking that all artists are bad at math or too stupid to grasp calculus. You might be thinking that there are no applications of calculus in art. I don't know. But given the role artists are supposed to play in society, it seems pretty reasonable to expect that some of them will have an interest in learning calculus to a high school level like a significant fraction of the non-specialist public.

A concrete example of this might be an artist who is interested in systems theory from an ecological perspective. Once you start talking about stocks and flows (of fish or minerals or greenhouse gases) then calculus and differential equations are really the next thing to tackle.

[thethirdone]

I interpreted the vague "Artists?" very differently from you. I thought it was saying "What about this makes it appropriate for artists? It is not showing off the beauty and simplicity of Calculus."

> You might be thinking that all artists are bad at math or too stupid to grasp calculus

I think labeling it as "for Beginners and Artists" is actually doing some of that. I certainly would not make a book labeled for artists unless I thought it would be particularly good for artists and from what I have seen this book does not touch on creativity or beauty. Therefore it must be labeled as for Artists because they can't learn calculus from existing books which might imply "all artists are bad at math or too stupid to grasp calculus".

[nothis]

Thank you!