>Hi Julian
>
>thanks for the note, I was a big unsure about including that line so
>I'm going to have to defend it a bit better.
>
>Folk psychology is no joke, it is in fact taken seriously by some
>philosophers as a means of drawing relevant conclusions about an
>individual's behaviour.
Yes, exactly because folk psychology is such a well known term, it is
a term that one cannot use as an authority (there is so much
divergent accounts of it). It is a bit like saying
"philosophers/scientists say that X" without mentioning whose theory
it is. So I meant by "joke" not folk psychology, but the affirmative
attitude toward such highly disputed concepts like competition,
stress and a "prospering of individuality".
>(Daniel Dennett's comments about thermostats come to mind). However
>the Churchlands have spent a great deal of energy trying to
>discredit it, calling it "a stagnant and degenerating research
>program"
Yes, I think it may be good to at least acknowledge that taking such
points of view you take a very strong and specific political (I would
say: "right wing") attitude. I don't know if this is intended, or
even necessary.
btw, thanks for sharing the paper!
>
>I did try to take a light tone in the paper as often as possible, so
>that people wouldn't take things too seriously (but it seems some
>people did anyway....). But the competitive performances are no joke
>- they really happen and are a lot of fun!
>
>Marcel
>
>On 22/02/2008, Julian Rohrhuber
><<mailto:rohrhuber_at_uni-hamburg.de>rohrhuber_at_uni-hamburg.de> wrote:
>
>Hi Marcel,
>
>it seems that many of your claims would need to be verified or at
>least sources should be added. An example: "Folk psychology tells us
>that stress is healthy and necessary for an individual to prosper."
>It seems that this is rather some kind of free market evangelist's
>folk psychology? Sorry maybe I take it to be serious and it is all a
>joke anyway..
>
>
>
>
>>Hi Kas and Andrew
>>
>>You both bring up some very interesting points.
>>
>>quoting Kas:
>>"I talked about this because of Marcel's competitions which have
>>rules about loading files (so everything has to be written on the
>>spot, (which I like as a perspective) but those rules don't take
>>into account that different systems consider different things to be
>>a part of the language itself nor for open-source systems being
>>changeable themselves, making the whole rule moot, in a way."
>>
>>and quoting Andrew:
>>"Yes, exactly, but it is important not to let the process become
>>more important than the result. Don't think I'm arguing for perfect
>>performances here, I certainly don't mean to suggest that, but if
>>you are going to have a programming competition then make it about
>>programming. "
>>
>>In the competitions that I organize I try to divert attention away
>>from these aspects. My primary focus is to bring live coding to a
>>lay-audience. The competitive element is there to create excitement,
>>and the rules that I've formulated are not intended to highlight
>>programming skills but thinking skills. I want an audience who
>>understands nothing at all about coding to at least understand that
>>what is being projected is a manifestation of a thought process. The
>>idea is that the performer who demonstrates superior thinking would
>>"win". The audience votes for the winner based on applause. And I
>>would prefer that the audience voted on the basis of what they
>>experienced as a performance rather than asking them to base their
>>choice on something they don't understand (C, SC, CK or whatever). A
>>competition which would be about programming would require an expert
>>jury to decide the winner, and I am targeting a decidedly non-expert
>>audience as the jury.
>>
>>I would like very much if we could go into the discussion further,
>>but I think it would be useful if the interested parties would read
>>my article and respond to what's written there:
>
>><<http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/><http://kmt.hku.nl/~marcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>http://kmt.hku.nl/~marcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/<<http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>
>
>>
>>(because it's still a draft I wasn't planning to make it broadly
>>public yet, but what the heck...)
>>
>>looking forward to debate...
>>
>>Marcel
>
>
>
>--
>
>
>
>
>
>.
--
.
Received on Mon Feb 25 2008 - 13:30:48 GMT