You can avoid introducing the names, but I don't think that there's a way to avoid introducing the concepts. I mean, the hint given for the problem is that "either the space is discrete or it's not," i.e. either it has a limit point or it doesn't. Although, since he uses this particular dichotomy and has mentioned convergence of sequences at this point, my guess is that the proof he has in mind is to show that if {x_n} is a sequence of elements converging to x with no x_n equal to x, then the elements {x_n} form a discrete subspace. Frankly, I think you should attempt my approach, since the lemmas you'll have to prove (that every open set around an accumulation point of the space contains infinitely many elements) will be stuff you have to do as problems in the next chapter anyway, and you may as well get them out of the way.
Also, let me clarify one point the author doesn't: while he casually introduces the concept of a discrete space as one equipped with the discrete metric, he then goes on to use it to refer to any set with an equivalent metric (i.e. one where every set is open). This is standard mathematical usage, but I don't think he mentions that anywhere between when he first defines a discrete space and this problem.