> But for math proofs, we shouldn't assume that people have competence of common basic parts. Well, it does depend on the audience you're writing for. So resea

> But for math proofs, we shouldn't assume that people have competence of common basic parts. Well, it does depend on the audience you're writing for. So research math doesn't do that, whereas first-year undergrad math makes an effort to. I think it's essential for first-year math programs to have a course where you redevelop basic induction, natural numbers, addition, etc. from first-order logic and rules of inference and ZFC, which I don't think is true everywhere. And there should be an aspect of it that's about converting that formal proof to informal proof given some assumptions about the reader. Beyond this, it starts to get tedious.