Have you read the article? One of his arguments is that math, due to its interface, is not about ideas but about abstract symbols and "symbol-pushing tricks".

Have you read the article? One of his arguments is that math, due to its interface, is not about ideas but about abstract symbols and "symbol-pushing tricks". For example many people know how to use the chain rule when they derive a function, without even having the slightest grasp of what is going on. How is this any different from "learning a mnemonic poem to remember the law of proportion"?