5 ms·

>When these technologies become embedded in society, he argues, life is reduced to checkboxes. This idea is part of why I think it's so crucial to teach the hu

>When these technologies become embedded in society, he argues, life is reduced to checkboxes. This idea is part of why I think it's so crucial to teach the humanities to all people, especially those in STEM fields where the humanities are lacking at best and received as hostile at worst. I firmly believe most of what it means to be a human is not quantifiable and we lose a tremendous amount of meaning in our lives when we're literally reduced to "going through the motions": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therblig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therblig

whatshisface 8y ago
>I firmly believe most of what it means to be a human is not quantifiable This is a tired argument, especially because it itself is taking the first step towards quantifying what it is saying can't be quantified. First you have Boolean categories ("what it means to be human," and "what it doesn't mean to be human"), and later on you refine them into more subtle models, models which sometimes use real numbers to express their parameters. Even by suggesting that "what it means to be human" is a coherent category into which things can fall, you are already on the road to quantifying it.
- notduncansmith 8y ago
  While I think you have an excellent point, I believe what most people mean when they say “not quantifiable” is “not fully quantifiable” as opposed to “completely indescribable”. I think this phrase reflects acceptance of the underlying principle behind Gödel’s Incompleteness and the Halting Problem.
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    >I believe what most people mean when they say “not quantifiable” is “not fully quantifiable” as opposed to “completely indescribable”. Describing something and quantifying it are not distinct actions. If you think you can make any progress at all in describing something, then you are doing the same thing as those enigmatic "quantifiers." The only reason it seems different to say "this apple is red," versus "this apple weighs a half pound" is because people are a lot more handy with colors than fractions.
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      Quantifying requires numbers, while description does not. I find your comment lacking (description), but I don't have a meaningful numeric value handy for how much so (quantification).
      - User1020 8y ago
        Sounds to me like those against "measurement" are too lazy to argue to make their point or don't want to have their views challenged. That may be fine in isolation, but we are a community trying to solve problems; opinions ("lacking") are useless in this realm.
      - whatshisface 8y ago
        >Quantifying requires numbers, while description does not. That statement is equivalent to, "Uantifying requires words that start with U, while in complete contrast Wuantifying requires words that start with W." Granted I should have said, "not meaningfully distinct," but the point is that the only reason there appears to be a boundary between Uantifying and Wuantifying is because there is one group of people that know a lot of W-words and almost no U-words, and another group of people that know almost no W-words but many U-words. Each group thinks they see a "material" boundary while in reality the only distinguishing line is edge of their own familiarity.
- BWStearns 8y ago
  Found the haskeller.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- minikites 8y ago
  The fact that you're reducing my comment to mere categorization kind of proves my point. "What it means to be human" is not a category of activity, it's an ongoing process that we create through living in a world with other people and finding meaning in our interactions with our predecessors (e.g. examining ancient art or living with the insufficiencies of a building that was built centuries ago), our peers in the present, and our considerations for those that come after us in the future.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    A number is the process of selecting a point out of infinite possibilities on a number line. Life is the process of selecting things out of not quite infinite possibilities but unimaginably large. These things are similar when you look at them like this, and numbers are richer than the real world, because they aren't finite.
cmoscoso 8y ago
And UI design?
abtinf 8y ago
I had more than enough mandatory garbage humanities classes in college. The humanities are incredibly important. Philosophy is a guide to everyday life. Literature can be uplifting. Art is a source of spiritual fuel. But the humanities in college deserves nothing but contempt, because it perverts every field. Philosophy is used to prove nothing can be known. Art is used to inflict depravity. If anything, the humanities need a lot more STEM thinking.
- clydethefrog 8y ago
  Could you explain how art is used to inflict depravity?
  - dang 8y ago
    Please don't feed egregious comments by replying. This is in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
mrdodge 8y ago
I think a lot of the problem is education. Without education a lot of these ideas wouldn't occur.

whatshisface 8y ago

>I firmly believe most of what it means to be a human is not quantifiable This is a tired argument, especially because it itself is taking the first step towards quantifying what it is saying can't be quantified. First you have Boolean categories ("what it means to be human," and "what it doesn't mean to be human"), and later on you refine them into more subtle models, models which sometimes use real numbers to express their parameters. Even by suggesting that "what it means to be human" is a coherent category into which things can fall, you are already on the road to quantifying it.

notduncansmith 8y ago
While I think you have an excellent point, I believe what most people mean when they say “not quantifiable” is “not fully quantifiable” as opposed to “completely indescribable”. I think this phrase reflects acceptance of the underlying principle behind Gödel’s Incompleteness and the Halting Problem.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  >I believe what most people mean when they say “not quantifiable” is “not fully quantifiable” as opposed to “completely indescribable”. Describing something and quantifying it are not distinct actions. If you think you can make any progress at all in describing something, then you are doing the same thing as those enigmatic "quantifiers." The only reason it seems different to say "this apple is red," versus "this apple weighs a half pound" is because people are a lot more handy with colors than fractions.
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    Quantifying requires numbers, while description does not. I find your comment lacking (description), but I don't have a meaningful numeric value handy for how much so (quantification).
    - User1020 8y ago
      Sounds to me like those against "measurement" are too lazy to argue to make their point or don't want to have their views challenged. That may be fine in isolation, but we are a community trying to solve problems; opinions ("lacking") are useless in this realm.
    - whatshisface 8y ago
      >Quantifying requires numbers, while description does not. That statement is equivalent to, "Uantifying requires words that start with U, while in complete contrast Wuantifying requires words that start with W." Granted I should have said, "not meaningfully distinct," but the point is that the only reason there appears to be a boundary between Uantifying and Wuantifying is because there is one group of people that know a lot of W-words and almost no U-words, and another group of people that know almost no W-words but many U-words. Each group thinks they see a "material" boundary while in reality the only distinguishing line is edge of their own familiarity.
BWStearns 8y ago
Found the haskeller.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
minikites 8y ago
The fact that you're reducing my comment to mere categorization kind of proves my point. "What it means to be human" is not a category of activity, it's an ongoing process that we create through living in a world with other people and finding meaning in our interactions with our predecessors (e.g. examining ancient art or living with the insufficiencies of a building that was built centuries ago), our peers in the present, and our considerations for those that come after us in the future.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  A number is the process of selecting a point out of infinite possibilities on a number line. Life is the process of selecting things out of not quite infinite possibilities but unimaginably large. These things are similar when you look at them like this, and numbers are richer than the real world, because they aren't finite.

cmoscoso 8y ago

And UI design?

abtinf 8y ago

I had more than enough mandatory garbage humanities classes in college. The humanities are incredibly important. Philosophy is a guide to everyday life. Literature can be uplifting. Art is a source of spiritual fuel. But the humanities in college deserves nothing but contempt, because it perverts every field. Philosophy is used to prove nothing can be known. Art is used to inflict depravity. If anything, the humanities need a lot more STEM thinking.

clydethefrog 8y ago
Could you explain how art is used to inflict depravity?
- dang 8y ago
  Please don't feed egregious comments by replying. This is in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

mrdodge 8y ago

I think a lot of the problem is education. Without education a lot of these ideas wouldn't occur.