Reply to comment

As one of the people who struggles with breaking problem down into smaller things then building them back up, I think way of naming the problem (not as engagement with "math" or "science" but rather imaginative suspension of resolution without losing track of that which we seek to resolve).  For me, it's important to get farther to a sense purpose (not necessarily, or even primary, practical relevance, which I often find a rather boring, scolding appeal -- like, I don't really care about the design of elevators or the lift airplanes) -- of import -- what is at stake in thought -- than is often clear to me.  And the smaller and smaller bits also come across to me as dry as a bone.  Too sheer, no handholds.  I want handholds that are meaning-oriented, not thing- or process- or achievement-oriented.