> His polemic against determinants is poorly motivated, misguided, and distracting. What polemic? Defining the determinant as the unique multilinear alternatin

> His polemic against determinants is poorly motivated, misguided, and distracting. What polemic? Defining the determinant as the unique multilinear alternating form satisfying certain properties is very normal (and in fact the only way that really makes sense for both finite- and infinite-dimensional vector spaces). There are zero unusual things with this book imo.