Is it worth studying mathematics from primary sources?

Question

Mathematics

Hello Lord!
I would like to ask a question about the study of mathematics.
In general, is it worth doing this by referring directly to the primary sources, their authors, who made discoveries in the fields of this science?
It seems to me that they deviate least of all from the essence of the subject, object and area being studied, unlike, for example, some textbooks. Yes, I understand that they are most likely more difficult to learn and much of it may not be relevant today (or even erroneous)! Still, is this method of study more effective? After all, we still read the books of the geniuses of our time (and sometimes not only ours)!
Unfortunately, I didn’t manage to google a lot about this, as, in principle, on the relevance of primary sources.
Will I understand the subject perfectly if I manage to study the material from the original source?
And so, how good is this idea and does it have an advantage and prospects (or, in fact, vice versa)?

Examples of primary sources:

"Начала" Евклида,
Книги Пифагора,
Аристотеля,
Рене Декарта и проч.

Links on this subject that I could find:

www.bolshoyvopros.ru/questions/1331060-pochemu-uch...
https://poisk-ru.ru/s52549t13.html
https://thequestion.ru/questions/73301/stoit_li_se...

A small comment on the question

На счет неправильности информации изложенной в материалах первоисточников. Даже если там что-то неверно, я думаю в последующие века ученые замечали эти ошибки и исправляли. Если я комплексно изучу их труды, значит ли это, что в полученных мною знаниях не будут содержаться ложные утверждения и ошибки того времени? Если в голове останется что-нибудь ложное, я думаю я смогу исправить это более современными книгами и исследованиями, а учитывая, что читать и изучать их будет гораздо легче, стоит ли эта игра свеч?

Answer 1

It is quite possible to read the works of some mathematicians of the 20th century and learn something useful, they use fairly modern terminology and notation. Unlike the older ones, where sometimes all brains are twisted from some designations. But it doesn't make much sense. From the point of view of content, mathematics does not depend on who expounds it. But from the point of view of acquiring further new knowledge and understanding with other people who know mathematics, it is still better to read current modern literature.

Answer 2

Of course it's worth it. At the same time, learn ancient Greek, Arabic and Latin. Very useful knowledge. Especially in the modern world.

Answer 3

No.
The terminology has changed over the years. Views, new discoveries.
As a study of history, you can read.
But the study of mathematics is not done by reading primary sources, but by repeatedly solving problems. After a long practice, even if you have not yet memorized many formulas by heart, you have an intuitive understanding of what and how to do approximately, and you are already climbing into the reference book to peep exactly. But you already know which directory and why.
And with theory, you can read a lot of books, pick up buzzwords, but you can’t study mathematics at the same time, and if you need to make some calculations of a level a little more than the 5th grade, you become in a stupor without knowing where to start.

Answer 4

Only for professional study of the history of mathematics.

Answer 5

Are you going to study history or how?)) When I last checked mathematics was an exact science, getting 4 by adding two twos should be in the original source and in modern manuals. And of course, in addition to the topics of study, you pick up already outdated things from which in the future there will only be harm. You know how to study astronomy using the scientific materials of Galileo, but he was in many ways an innovator and his achievements are also used in modern science, but if you look at it as a whole, then his works are now like flat-earthers for him then.
p\s Well, do not forget that mathematics has been for many thousands of years, and if you study everything from primary sources, then there will be 500 times more material to study (not a joke), things will constantly be duplicated, errors will be corrected

Answer 6

Without understanding the meaning of logical conclusions, you will not understand mathematics in any language and from any source.
First, learn to follow the logic of actions and fully understand what is happening with any mathematical proofs, conclusions, and the mathematical formulas and expressions themselves.

Answer 7

At the expense of the incorrectness of the information presented in the materials of the primary sources. Even if there is something wrong, I think in subsequent centuries, scientists noticed these errors and corrected them. If I comprehensively study their works, does this mean that the knowledge I have gained will not contain false statements and errors of that time?

This makes sense to ask in relation to physics or chemistry (and other natural sciences). But this is not applicable to mathematics, because Mathematics is fundamentally different from other sciences. There were no errors in the writings of ancient mathematicians. The very essence of mathematics suggests that in the theoretical part no mistakes are made and there is nothing to correct. With the past centuries, mathematics is only supplemented by new sections, new axioms and theorems, and so on. Ancient mathematical methods may cease to be used in practice, because more efficient methods have been invented that give the same result faster or easier. But ancient methods do not become erroneous.
In all natural sciences, in any age, mistakes are made and corrected later. Mathematics is not designed this way because it does not study nature. Mathematics comes up with the rules of the game and then plays by those rules. Let me give you a metaphor: they invented chess, and even if a million years pass, no one will say that a mistake was made in the rules of chess and now we understand that we need to play differently. No, rules are rules. You can come up with new games with new rules. Some games may be on a chessboard or use the same chess pieces , but this will not be a fixchess, these will be new games. This is how mathematics works. Only, unlike chess, poker or dominoes, the game according to the rules of mathematics can be applied to other sciences and this allows you to calculate really existing things.