[Wittrs] Re: When is "brain talk" really dualism? (nominalism, yet again)

  • From: "jrstern" <jrstern@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:34:34 -0000

--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kirby urner <kirby.urner@...> wrote:
>
> > 2. Kirby responds by telling Josh he thinks in the computer language, BASIC.
> 
> Well, I recall Josh saying to us as a list that he thinks in BASIC,

No, I said I have worked in a dozen dialects of Basic,
from pretty nearly the original to the newer VBA, VB.net, and 
such that have all the features Djikstra could want.  But my 
major work the last few years has been in SQL dialects, fwiw.


> had a lot of experience with that language.  I'd argue my position 
> is factual, whereas Josh's command of English is clearly no better 
> than mine, so his was just a diss.

I have given a number of dictionary entries for nominalism
and you have not.  Instead, you diss dictionaries.


> I'm actually attacking BASIC for real.  I'm a leading education
> reformer and don't think we can afford some kind of national
> curriculum in which VBA or VB muscles in as the language of the
> future.  These are important issues whereas getting along with Josh 
> on this list is entirely doable, especially if he takes the time to 
> (a) learn some Python, which is clearly nominalist in flavor and 
> (b) maybe lose the dead albatross and join the Wittgenstein camp.

I have worked in Python, and a dozen Python-like languages.

And I did pretty much everything that is now in Python, 
back when it was only available in Interlisp, twenty-plus 
years ago, and Python was still just some fairly recent
reruns of the BBC shows.


Kirby, I'm happy to disagree with you in detail, but you're
drifting a long way from facts.

Josh

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. wittrs
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2009