3 ms·

In the days before contact lenses people who wore glasses were in the minority. Sometimes they were ridiculed. Today it seems rare to find somebody who doesn't

In the days before contact lenses people who wore glasses were in the minority. Sometimes they were ridiculed. Today it seems rare to find somebody who doesn't benefit from corrective lenses. I don't think human optic abilities have deteriorated so much as human culture has shifted. But we still think people with 20/20 vision have ideal vision. We don't consider them to have a condition with a label like "myopia". If 90% of people exhibit some characteristics of the autism spectrum, shouldn't we start to consider the people with none as the ones worthy of a label? Like people with true pitch. We give them a label, not people with less than perfect pitch. Perhaps pedantry is like true pitch or "perfect" vision. It's actually a good thing. Even if it annoys people who don't have it. I wonder if people with true pitch go through life cringing on the inside every time they hear a wrong note. But they learn to never let on that they notice. Perhaps the part of pedantry that puts a person on the autism spectrum is not so much the noticing as it is the voicing--the seeming inability to control the expression and calling out a correction instead of just letting it slide.

naremu 3y ago
Well if OP's original "missing the forest for the trees" analogy is to be revisited (which I tend to agree with), it's that pedantry is sort of by (some) definition focusing on the letter rather than the spirit of what's at hand, and due to its often lack of necessity, comes across as taking the opportunity to "one up" or criticize something that doesn't end up making any pragmatic differences. I've heard some people describe the compulsion something along the lines of "I don't think of it that way, I just noticed something they said was incorrect and so I presented them the correct information", often assuming it would be appreciated. I mean, it's probably good for engineers in the engineering room, but the culture outside of maker's spaces probably won't consider it smashing conversation.
mrguyorama 3y ago
>I don't think human optic abilities have deteriorated so much as human culture has shifted. You are simply wrong. This is a well demonstrated reality: We have more myopia than we used to. It probably (as in, initial studies are showing) that it has to do with getting enough sunlight.

naremu 3y ago

Well if OP's original "missing the forest for the trees" analogy is to be revisited (which I tend to agree with), it's that pedantry is sort of by (some) definition focusing on the letter rather than the spirit of what's at hand, and due to its often lack of necessity, comes across as taking the opportunity to "one up" or criticize something that doesn't end up making any pragmatic differences. I've heard some people describe the compulsion something along the lines of "I don't think of it that way, I just noticed something they said was incorrect and so I presented them the correct information", often assuming it would be appreciated. I mean, it's probably good for engineers in the engineering room, but the culture outside of maker's spaces probably won't consider it smashing conversation.

mrguyorama 3y ago

>I don't think human optic abilities have deteriorated so much as human culture has shifted. You are simply wrong. This is a well demonstrated reality: We have more myopia than we used to. It probably (as in, initial studies are showing) that it has to do with getting enough sunlight.