I have to disagree with that kind of absolutist statement.<p>I become interested in mathematics at a young age. While puzzles and such have sort-of interested me, the truly amazing part of math has always been it&#x27;s ability to open up more abstract ways of thinking - new and exciting ways to unify ideas. (I read Gardner as a kid and got rather little of him. His puzzles go so quickly from simple games to really hard math that it&#x27;s easy to get lost. I honestly would see him as a terrible introduction to math for kids since a kid reading him will hit quickly &quot;why can&#x27;t I solve this even slightly&quot; moments, which isn&#x27;t a way to encourage someone).<p>A lot of puzzles to my mind seem to have &quot;trick&quot; solutions. They&#x27;re nice for increasing one&#x27;s ability to manipulate symbols but they aren&#x27;t really introducing new worlds into one&#x27;s thinking.<p>I enjoy abstract algebra, functional analysis and differential geometry more than number theory, which is the branch of math closest to ordinary puzzle solving. On the other hand, category theory seems more like accounting to me but clearly category theory has yielded results that have advanced many parts of math and computer science.<p>I can certainly acknowledge that others might have different tastes and the development of math has certainly has come through different people developing their particular interests rather than there being a simple &quot;fun&quot;&#x2F;&quot;not-fun&quot; division.