4 ms·
I'm arguing in favor of simplicity, not of simplicity of reach (tiny hand movement) but of simplicity of meaning. Bringing up Hume's guillotine [1] to show som
by talles 10y ago
I'm arguing in favor of simplicity, not of simplicity of reach (tiny hand movement) but of simplicity of meaning.
Bringing up Hume's guillotine [1] to show someone that version numbers is not what it seems to be to that individual is a bit of an overkill, don't you think?
If we start to see everything as Kant's golden rule [2], Sartre's existence problem [3], Wittgenstein's private language [4] and Marx's worker struggle [5] is going to be very hard at all to communicate simple ideas, most of time those are arguments that raises more questions than answers.
To make a programming analogy, is a bit like design patterns, sometimes is nice to say "it's just a factory" without having to go throughout the concept of factory, but if you overuse it and start talking only in patterns it all becomes a mess.
If it's complex, suite yourself. If it ain't, don't make it so.
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT7yXG2aJdY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT7yXG2aJdY
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_uUEaeqFog https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_uUEaeqFog
[3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpXNRrtuo38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpXNRrtuo38
[4]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x86hLtOkou8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x86hLtOkou8
[5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4VzhIuKCQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ4VzhIuKCQ
- nitrogen 10y agoYou are introducing ideas named for people, rather than the idea itself. Of course that will obscure meaning, and you are only further deteriorating the SNR of the thread by doing so.
- talles 10y agoAnd you didn't like that, right? You felt as being noise to the actual meaning I'm trying to convey. Precisely my point.
- nitrogen 10y agoNo, it comes across as a deliberate tactic, entirely unrelated to the benign use of "naturalistic fallacy" in the original comment. I feel the actual meaning you are trying to convey is noise, and you've done so in a way that is not representative of the original comment.
- talles 10y agoYes, my saying is "deliberate", I'm in full command of my actions and thinking. And yes, it is a "tactic", after all I'm trying to do something here (convey a point in an argumentation). I hope that by "deliberate tactic" you didn't try to imply as being "mean" or "bad" or not "benign". As for the "benign use" you mentioned, it is clearly your opinion on it, but where are your reasons, your arguments in favour of it? (welcome to the conversation)
- nitrogen 10y agoA deliberately obtuse tactic. Your point is not well made, and is a waste of thread space. The arguments in favor of the original comment have been stated by others. I will not continue replying.
- nitrogen 10y agoHmm. While I stand by the sentiment of this comment, in hindsight I could have worded it less harshly.