> Mathematicians already know what it means for a proof to be constructive or not constructive, and they know it's easier to work with constructive proofs.
It is often more easy to prove that some object exists (by contradiction) than to construct such an object.
For example: by applying Zorn's lemma it is easy to prove that any vector space has a Hamel basis. But it is often non-trivial to construct such a basis.
It is often more easy to prove that some object exists (by contradiction) than to construct such an object.
For example: by applying Zorn's lemma it is easy to prove that any vector space has a Hamel basis. But it is often non-trivial to construct such a basis.