Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Wolf Kirchmeir (wwolfkir_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 02/27/05
- Next message: Betelgeuse: "f is constant?"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: Largest prime ever just discovered"
- In reply to: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:29:25 -0500
Albert wrote:
> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>
>> Albert wrote:
>>
>>> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>>>
>>>> Albert wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> This is purely anecdotal, but in my whole career working with
>>>>> college graduates having a variety of majors, I noted that
>>>>> mathematicians were singularly the most ineffective programmers,
>>>>> due primarily to their inability or unwillingness to step out of
>>>>> their bubble and actually grasp just what the problem to be solved
>>>>> really was.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're not the only one to have noticed this. In the early, early
>>>> days of recruiting programmers, it was found that musicians and
>>>> housewives generally did much better than math majors. Apparently
>>>> the musicians were already used to programming (a score is program,
>>>> after all), and housewives undertsood recipes...
>>>
>>>
>>> You should remove the word 'apparently' from your writing vocabulary,
>>> in that your assumptions are nearly always wrong. You would make a
>>> poor programmer because you believe that good programming consists of
>>> reading and following prewritten scores and recipes.
>>
>>
>> HUH????????
>>
>> The reason musicians and hosuewives made good programmers (and they
>> did - look it up) is that they udnerstood how recipes and scores
>> worked. So they knew how to make them. A score is a program, so is a
>> recipe -- or
>> hadn't you noticed? A recipe written for a trained cook is a program
>> in object code, even Unlike a recipe written for a beginning cook,
>> which is procedural.)
>
>
> Perhaps we are talking past each other. Creating recipes and scores is a
> totally different process than reading and following recipes and scores.
True, but you are mnore likely to find people who can write recipes
amongst those who use them every day than amongst those who don't. :-)
- Next message: Betelgeuse: "f is constant?"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: Largest prime ever just discovered"
- In reply to: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|