3 ms·
I think that's orthogonal. The author is not saying that everything in every field is good: their TV example explicitly calls out bad TV. What they are saying
by williamdclt 1y ago
I think that's orthogonal. The author is not saying that everything in every field is good: their TV example explicitly calls out bad TV.
What they are saying is that you can make yourself enjoy a field _at all_, in which you can then apply taste. For example I don't like whisky, but that's not a matter of me applying "good taste": I would never claim that whisky is bad in general and if I really tried I'm pretty sure I would start being able to enjoy whisky and separate the good from the bad (at least subjectively).
- esafak 1y agoAbsolutely! One can also recognize the good and the bad in a field that one dislikes, judged by its own criteria.
- manfromchina1 1y ago> I think that's orthogonal. One time on 4chan I mentioned I liked how users on HN like to pepper their speech with little math words like so: "Love is orthogonal to distance, modulo trust, and the parameters aren’t marginal". People wouldnt believe me this was normal talk. Case in point. Although this was more prevalent on HN about 10 years ago. Or maybe now as well. I dont read comments as much these days.
- mythrwy 1y agoIt was an "order of magnitude" more prevalent on HN about 10 years ago. But this is orthogonal to the original topic.
- xenobeb 1y agoTaste isn't static over time either. My favorite thing is to rediscover something I thought in the past was terrible only to now find I love it.
- harperlee 1y agoWhat about the converse: showing your significant other e.g. the best film ever, only to discover with horror how bad your taste was a number of years ago?