4 ms·

Interesting, but I still disagree. To the extent that code is a tool, it's as fundamental as a pencil and paper. However, I believe that it runs much deeper tha

by geebee 8y ago

Interesting, but I still disagree. To the extent that code is a tool, it's as fundamental as a pencil and paper. However, I believe that it runs much deeper than a tool, even a very fundamental one. I was a double major in literature and math (CS emphasis), and I think people really overlook how fundamentally algorithmic thinking structures your mind, at a very deep level. I think it is particularly valuable in combination with other approaches, which is why I encourage people who study CS to read and study widely in the humanities and sciences. I think people who do that can have unusual insight into topics well outside the traditional realm of CS. I do think differently about problems well outside the realm of CS because of my background in CS. You don't strictly need to code to develop this kind of thinking, but coding is a good way to develop it. For me, it has been as fundamental as literary analysis or mathematical proof.

root_axis 8y ago
> To the extent that code is a tool, it's as fundamental as a pencil and paper This is very clearly false. I'll sidestep the semantic argument regarding pen/paper vs a keyboard, but the bottom line is that reading and writing are fundamental communication skills that represent the bedrock of civilization and while computers are obviously a revolutionary and world-changing technology the likes of which we've never seen before, the same can be said of physics, chemistry, metallurgy, agriculture etc. These skills just aren't a requirement for being a productive citizen (like reading and writing); they're just not. > I think people really overlook how fundamentally algorithmic thinking structures your mind People overlook lots of important insights about psychology, biology, and physics, it doesn't mean those things are fundamental skills comparable to literacy. > but coding is a good way to develop it I totally agree that writing code is a guaranteed way to enhance logical and critical thinking skills but the same is true of studying logic directly, or physics, biology etc
- geebee 8y ago
  > I totally agree that writing code is a guaranteed way to enhance logical and critical thinking skills but the same is true of studying logic directly, or physics, biology etc That goes well beyond "simply a lucrative trade", though, doesn't it? Even if we disagree about whether it is fundamental in and of itself (akin to algorithmic thinking), or just similar to physics or studying logic directly.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    > That goes well beyond "simply a lucrative trade", though, doesn't it Sure. When I say it is "simply a lucrative trade" I don't mean to characterize programming as sterile or mundane, I only mean to suggest that the programmer's vaunted status as a profession is a function of the current labor market and not a function of some quality specific to the ability to write software. Writing software is a trade-skill subject to market forces, literacy is a critical thinking skill more akin to logic itself.
    - kthielen 8y ago
      > Writing software is a trade-skill subject to market forces, literacy is a critical thinking skill more akin to logic itself. False dichotomy, these things you distinguish are just two sides of the same coin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspon...
      - root_axis 8y ago
        Writing software requires applied logical thinking, but that doesn't make it a fundamental skill. Your reasoning is akin to suggesting that solving a Rubik's cube is a fundamental skill because it requires logical thinking to solve. If the total number of senior engineers on the market increased 10,000% overnight, the value of programming as a skill would instantly plummet, given the same scenario for rates of literacy, the value of literacy would remain the same or perhaps even increase. This is because literacy is a force multiplier in all aspects of career advancement while software programming simply isn't. If you glance anywhere outside the IT echo-chamber to examine the value of literacy vs programming the point I'm making becomes very obvious. Nearly every high prestige profession (lawyer, doctor, scientist, architect, author etc) is amplified by literary skills whereas this is obviously untrue for programming.

by geebee 8y ago

root_axis 8y ago

> To the extent that code is a tool, it's as fundamental as a pencil and paper This is very clearly false. I'll sidestep the semantic argument regarding pen/paper vs a keyboard, but the bottom line is that reading and writing are fundamental communication skills that represent the bedrock of civilization and while computers are obviously a revolutionary and world-changing technology the likes of which we've never seen before, the same can be said of physics, chemistry, metallurgy, agriculture etc. These skills just aren't a requirement for being a productive citizen (like reading and writing); they're just not. > I think people really overlook how fundamentally algorithmic thinking structures your mind People overlook lots of important insights about psychology, biology, and physics, it doesn't mean those things are fundamental skills comparable to literacy. > but coding is a good way to develop it I totally agree that writing code is a guaranteed way to enhance logical and critical thinking skills but the same is true of studying logic directly, or physics, biology etc

geebee 8y ago
> I totally agree that writing code is a guaranteed way to enhance logical and critical thinking skills but the same is true of studying logic directly, or physics, biology etc That goes well beyond "simply a lucrative trade", though, doesn't it? Even if we disagree about whether it is fundamental in and of itself (akin to algorithmic thinking), or just similar to physics or studying logic directly.
- root_axis 8y ago
  > That goes well beyond "simply a lucrative trade", though, doesn't it Sure. When I say it is "simply a lucrative trade" I don't mean to characterize programming as sterile or mundane, I only mean to suggest that the programmer's vaunted status as a profession is a function of the current labor market and not a function of some quality specific to the ability to write software. Writing software is a trade-skill subject to market forces, literacy is a critical thinking skill more akin to logic itself.
  - kthielen 8y ago
    > Writing software is a trade-skill subject to market forces, literacy is a critical thinking skill more akin to logic itself. False dichotomy, these things you distinguish are just two sides of the same coin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspon...
    - root_axis 8y ago
      Writing software requires applied logical thinking, but that doesn't make it a fundamental skill. Your reasoning is akin to suggesting that solving a Rubik's cube is a fundamental skill because it requires logical thinking to solve. If the total number of senior engineers on the market increased 10,000% overnight, the value of programming as a skill would instantly plummet, given the same scenario for rates of literacy, the value of literacy would remain the same or perhaps even increase. This is because literacy is a force multiplier in all aspects of career advancement while software programming simply isn't. If you glance anywhere outside the IT echo-chamber to examine the value of literacy vs programming the point I'm making becomes very obvious. Nearly every high prestige profession (lawyer, doctor, scientist, architect, author etc) is amplified by literary skills whereas this is obviously untrue for programming.