In regard to the "implicit assumption" that you think you detect, I believe you read more into the word "present" than was intended. Nevertheless, we may still differ around the general point. Your interpretation of "presentation" seems to be a worst-case portrayal of rigidity. Let me counter with a similar worst-case portrayal of the alternative:
When you speak of "exploration," do you mean that a geometry course should consist ENTIRELY of letting students loose with a few tools and drawing implements to rediscover in their 9th and/or 10th grade what it took humankind several thousand years to construct and organize? I hope not (although I have seen that approach proposed with a straight face). SOME exploration---even some unguided exploration---is useful and appropriate, but we do our students a disservice if we simply allow them to thrash about in deep water. We, as teachers, are paid to find and follow the not-so-narrow path between benign neglect and overbearing dictatorship.
When I speak of presenting an idea, I am speaking as a writer of text materials. If you don't believe in having a text, then there is no need or purpose for further discussion, because what I'm doing will be of no use to you. On the other hand, if you agree that a text may be useful for a mathematics class, then we can/must examine the question of how ideas will be presented in that text.