5 ms·
Minor rhetorical note - you used the phrase "exception that proves the rule" incorrectly. You used it to mean "the single exception to a general rule", with "o
by defen 16y ago
Minor rhetorical note - you used the phrase "exception that proves the rule" incorrectly. You used it to mean "the single exception to a general rule", with "open source software is necessary for a successful startup" being the rule, and Stack Overflow being the exception.
The phrase actually means that the existence of a specific rule implies that the negation is true for circumstances not covered by the rule. So, if half of the blocks in a city have "parking prohibited" signs, and no such signs elsewhere, that "proves" that parking is in fact allowed on the other blocks, since the signs are excepting the general rule. In other words, why would there be a sign if it was understood that there is no parking?
Sorry to make such a big point out of a small matter, but we already lost one good phrase ("Begging the question") to widespread improper usage. Wikipedia has more info, including the origin of the phrase: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule
- hasenj 16y agoThe rule is like: It's really really hard to make startups without the open-source Unix-based systems/tools
- defen 16y agoThe point is that the phrase "exception that proves the rule" should only be used when talking about man-made rules and laws, not inductive hypotheses. You don't get to use evidence against your hypothesis as evidence for your hypothesis! Put another way, when used correctly, "the exception that proves the rule" is a valid rhetorical phrase regardless of how many exceptions there are. Whereas if there were 500 successful startups using non-open-source tools, you wouldn't say that they were the exceptions that proved the rule.
- hasenj 16y ago> You don't get to use evidence against your hypothesis as evidence for your hypothesis! But you do. That's the point. It's not an absolute law. I'm sure you can find a great application written in Visual Basic. This doesn't make Visual Basic a great choice over Python. If you could list 50+ successful startups running on Windows, then you could say there's a strong evidence. And even then, this only proves that Windows is as good as Linux. It doesn't counter the original point about Linux being great despite not having a business model centered around IP.
- defen 16y agoI completely agree with your overall point - that open source Unix-type tools are better for startups, and that Windows-based tools aren't a good fit. I was simply saying that you used a rhetorical phrase incorrectly.