4 ms·
> Yes, they're dogmatic in the literal meaning of that word. Debatable. Guix has adequate grounds to build their beliefs on and they accept other stances besid
by Propelloni 2y ago
> Yes, they're dogmatic in the literal meaning of that word.
Debatable. Guix has adequate grounds to build their beliefs on and they accept other stances besides their own. Guix may think the others are wrong, but that's their privilege, just like you are privileged to think they are wrong. So they seem to be more principled than dogmatic.
- User23 2y agoA belief being dogmatic isn’t about adequacy of evidence or lack thereof. It’s about that belief being one that must be held to be in fully good standing with the organization for which it is a dogma. I think we can reasonably say the FSF’s teaching on software freedom is at least something very much like dogmatic. I happen to believe they’re essentially right, but we live in an imperfect world and I still want my microcode bugs patched so I do that.
- Retric 2y agoI’ve only seen something called dogmatic when it lacks obvious justification. Don’t operate heavy machinery while drunk is a lesson people and organizations learn over and over. Would you say it’s dogmatic?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Propelloni 2y agoHmh, that's not what the dictionary says.