'. '

Two sides

From APIDesign

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(=)
(More Computing Science and Less Computing)
Line 22: Line 22:
Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.
Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.
 +
 +
== How difficult is Programming? ==
 +
 +
Good programming is probably beyond the intellectual abilities of today's "average programmer". To do, hic et nunc, the job well with today's army of practitioners, many of whom have been lured into a profession beyond their intellectual abilities, is an insoluble problem.
 +
 +
Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]].

Revision as of 11:32, 17 January 2013

Edsger Dijkstra wrote an interesting essay called On the fact that the Atlantic Ocean has two sides, which, in some parts, nicely contributes to discussion about rationalism, empiricism and cluelessness. Here are few quotes I found inspiring.

Contents

Platonic or Pragmatic?

Traditionally there are two ways in which science can be justified, the Platonic and the pragmatic one. In the Platonic way — "l'art pour l'art" — science justifies itself by its beauty and internal consistency, in the pragmatic way science is justified by the usefulness of its products.

My overall impression is that along this scale Europe, for better or for worse, is more Platonic, whereas the USA, and Canada to a lesser extent, are more pragmatic...

Tolerance for soft science

The first phenomenon is a greater tolerance for the soft sciences which purport to contribute to the solutions of "real" problems, but whose "intellectual contents" are singularly lacking. (When I was a student at Leyden, a quarter of a century ago, economy and psychology had been admitted to the campus, but only with great reservations and absolutely no one considered them as respectable; we had not dreamt of "management science" — I think we would have regarded it as a contradiction in terms— and "business administration" as an academic discipline is still utterly preposterous.)

My note: Certainly a business administration can't be platonic. It has to be pragmatic, if not barbarian.

In Depth and Isolation

Dealing with some aspect of a complex problem "in depth and in isolation" implies two things. "In isolation" means that you are (temporarily) ignoring most other aspects of the original total problem, "in depth" means that you are willing to generalize the aspect under consideration, are willing to investigate variations that are needed for a proper understanding, but are in themselves of no significance within the original problem statement. The true integralist becomes impatient and annoyed at what he feels to be "games"; by his mental make-up he is compelled to remain constantly aware of the whole chain, when asked to focus his attention upon a single link

More Computing Science and Less Computing

Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...

Reminds me that I was learning programming in Karel on a computer I put together from paper clips.

How difficult is Programming?

Good programming is probably beyond the intellectual abilities of today's "average programmer". To do, hic et nunc, the job well with today's army of practitioners, many of whom have been lured into a profession beyond their intellectual abilities, is an insoluble problem.

Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But I got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely clueless.

Personal tools
buy