The concrete, of manipulable things, that can be touched, of the Real. Things that are gifts in ' ' here and agora' '. I believe that all we distinguish concrete and abstract. It is fact, the Mathematics deals with abstract things: numbers, points, straight lines, tangents, in some really not manipulable cases. But the fact to deal with some abstract ideas justifies its not-understanding? Perhaps let us have to reflect if some interest in keeping it does not exist, ' ' obscurecida' ' , supposedly for its abstraction.
Exactly because, the Mathematics is not alone that deals with abstract subjects and same affirming not to understand it, has those search that it, and also searchs to understand its concepts and ideas. Some other pertaining to school contents, by the way, the majority of the other contents deal with abstract subjects. A literary composition, for example, in the account on facts and personages who had never existed really or that if they had existed, almost always we interact with them in the literary composition not as people, but as personages, icons: they are abstractions in its more genuine form. with everything this, appreciates many it and looks for to understand it e, exactly that let us not love it, does not have terror or fear of it. Unless if it deals with a terror history. The psychoanalysis, established for Freud, deals with abstract too much concepts, and as it says the popular said one, ' ' only Freud explica' '. But the proper Freud said: ' ' I have very restricted capacities and talentos. None for Natural Sciences, none for the Mathematics, nothing for the things quantitativas' ' (apud Axe, 1993, p.21). It will be that if it justifies, then, to argue that a bad performance in Mathematics if of the pure one and simply for it to deal with abstract things? Let us reflect.