> He’s also always argued that mathematics is fundamentally about human understanding. It's also worth pointing out he didn't come up with this viewpoint just

> He’s also always argued that mathematics is fundamentally about human understanding. It's also worth pointing out he didn't come up with this viewpoint just to "cope" with the headlines. Thurston articulated this way back in the 90s (https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/9404236 https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/9404236) and also more recently (https://mathoverflow.net/questions/43690/whats-a-mathematician-to-do https://mathoverflow.net/questions/43690/whats-a-mathematici...): > The product of mathematics is clarity and understanding. Not theorems, by themselves. Is there, for example any real reason that even such famous results as Fermat's Last Theorem, or the Poincaré conjecture, really matter? Their real importance is not in their specific statements, but their role in challenging our understanding, presenting challenges that led to mathematical developments that increased our understanding.