3 ms·
The gap between the premises and conclusion of this argument seems broad to me... Here's the summary: (leaving out some smaller arguments i.e. scala/rust vs Go
by jfaucett 11y ago
The gap between the premises and conclusion of this argument seems broad to me...
Here's the summary: (leaving out some smaller arguments i.e. scala/rust vs Go language philosophy)
1. Go challenges peoples identity.
2. Challenging peoples identity makes them respond emotionaly not logicaly.
3. Other people are being deceived into liking Go.
4. People become more vocal as they attempt to sway the deceived from their erroneous path.
5. (conclusion): Therefore, everyone criticizes Go so much.
Notice all the premises could be true, but they would not strongly imply the "so much" part i.e. "a lot". It would just mean some people would respond more vocally/emotionaly, certainly not everyone.
Anyway, I think there's still some missing premise(s) which would explain why there is "a lot of" criticism for Go, if that is the case - I have no idea as I'm not involved with Go at all.
Anyone care to fill those in for me?
- jb613 11y agoOne premise that I think the author is wrong about is #3 (people being deceived into liking Go). My experience is that a number of folks liking Go is due to past experiences and recognizing Go's completely different approach resolves at least some of those deficiencies or the problems those practices eventually led to. But, I think the main point of the article is that Go's complete 180 on many things challenges the beliefs of some and hence their identity. We see it every time a discussion on Go pops up.