There's "before we agree on how to tell the story" in the sense of mythical stuff we could get away with before more forensic evidence was insisted upon (e.g. hominids originally picked up somewhere near Baghdad, emigrating from a certain Garden -- you'll need to prove that with the archeological record, or admit it's a myth, i.e. prehistory, i.e. some kind of prefrequency tale).
Then there's "previous in the sense of a priori" (whereas history, shall we say, is a lot a posteriori i.e. accidental -- it could have been otherwise in other words (but then aren't the maths more certain, more logical?)).
In the Hegelian view, mythical language occurs as we slide up the walls of the bowl, approaching the limits of our world, as mirrored in propositions (pre linguistic turn talk).
Literal history is more an antithesis, directly opposite pure reason in its spatio-temporal essentiality (the ultimate special case Universe).
So dialectic is always around the periphery -- no one ever challenges literal truths directly, unless they're asking to be considered crazy. New paradigms come in from the edges, for their brief turn in the sun (cite Kuhn).
I agree that the precalculus of yore has been superseded. There's no point trying to "improve" it, as the terrain is no longer considered prime real estate.
Almost no one wants to hang out a shingle as "precalculus teacher" any more; not a viable career option. We've moved on to other labels, a new namespace, one Haim doesn't seem concerned enough to actually study, but why should he? He's not a tenth grader, thinking ahead about what might be a worthwhile use of his talents and skills. He's let himself off the hook, when it comes to envisioning our future. It's all about money for him, and bank examiners (yawn).