That's a fine book. But to answer that question surely calls for emperical data?

Generations of teachers of mathematics-- surely not all incompetent-- have found that many people, perhaps most people, do not love math. There are very good teachers (I had a few), and very good ways to teach it (shout out to the Mr Barton Maths podcast), but experience shows that it is a hard go much of the time.

Good, keep all the maths for me.

This was downvoted, but I think it's an interesting argument, in this context and in general.

Should we be rooting for things that make supply of labor in our field more plentiful? Wouldn't it be in our self-interest to prevent as many people as possible from learning math and computer science? One could argue it wouldn't be in the interest of humans as a species, but I'm skeptical that the marginal loss to each of us is greater than the gain.

This is a good book but I'm not sure it's low-level enough for those people in high school who don't like or haven't learned enough math – he mentions matrices, sin/cos, real numbers, … right in the first chapter!

the beginning part on Sets is definitely enjoyable reading. thanks for putting that here for me to find.

You'll love Russell then.

https://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/br-ml-ch5.html#n8

He gets deep into some stuff, so read the parts that interest you. I also highly recommend his book, the problems of philosophy. It's really what I think math is all about.

Would you classify that book as good introduction to discrete math?

Yes, definitely. Albeit a very brief introduction. You can probably skip chapter 13 and 14. Although, arguably chapter 14 is the “culmination” of the book, the Cantor-Bernstein-Schroder theorem. It would be fun to do it anyway, since you would fully have the mathematical tools to understand it.

So why do I say it would be a good introduction to discrete math? Well, a lot of the examples and problems are discrete math type problems. Counting, graph theory, etc. Your life will be so much easier.