Anti-intellectual Euphemisms
I see this a lot, especially in programming forums.
- Using the word simple, natural, pragmatic, real world or intuitive to mean “I am able to understand this.”
- Conversely, using the word complex, unnatural, academic, “your world” or unintuitive to mean “I am not able nor am I willing to invest the effort to come to understand this.”
If someone does this, I will politely request that it stops, since it crushes any potential useful discussion.
–By request from Viktor. You don’t wanna mess with Viktor.
March 13th, 2011 at 10:17 am
I think the second part of your second bullet breaks down into two subcategories:
1. I am not willing to invest the effort to come to understand this because I am closed minded.
2. I am unable to invest the effort to come to understand this because the opportunity cost of learning it is too high.
#2 may be a perfectly rational position, especially for someone for whom programming and related disciplines represent a relatively small portion of their job. Also, a person coming from a rational position may be convinced otherwise by demonstrations of utility. A person who is simply closed minded cannot be convinced.
March 13th, 2011 at 10:45 am
Erik,
I agree that #2 is rational, right up to the point that you hide behind euphemisms rather than simply admit it. The transparency of these displays blows me away sometimes.
March 13th, 2011 at 11:49 am
There is a manifestation of both of your points that I like to call ‘hand-wringing for the next developer’ whom must somehow persevere in the face of an ‘obvious’ maintenance nightmare. This type of lazy appeal makes my mind shut down.
March 13th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
I wonder what you just said.
March 13th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Agree
When people misuse complexity I usually point them to John Castis : http://bit.ly/Casti_ComplexityAnIntroduction
(page 4 , simple systems exhibit the following characteristics)
But you might have a better definition?
March 13th, 2011 at 8:00 pm
rjan,
I’m not proposing a better definition for the term complex. I’m pretty sure I know what it’s not.
March 13th, 2011 at 11:11 pm
Hmm. I think an extra sentence would have helped — 2 less even more. I was only referring to the “how will anyone maintain this?” argument.
March 14th, 2011 at 8:21 am
I sometimes use the term simple in the context that you presented. I may post some throw away code so that when someone says that isn’t the right way to do it I can respond with, “well it is just a simple example”. I don’t usually use the converse.
Academic, I like that one.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:33 am
fogus,
Did you mean to post that on another post, Monads Do Not Compose?
March 14th, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Hah! So true.
April 6th, 2011 at 7:39 am
Definition from the Oxford English Dictionary for Simple : easily understood or done ; presenting no difficulty:
Definition from the Cambridge English Dictionary for Simple : easy to understand or do; not difficult
These two are probably the best known english dictionaries.
Not really sure what you’re contesting. Its probably something different than simple meaning easy to understand.
April 6th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Dhananjay,
You didn’t seem to read what I wrote. I didn’t attempt to redefine the word “simple.” Yes, you are unsure what it is I am “contesting”, but I’m not sure how to make it clearer — perhaps you can give me an indication.
April 6th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
Yes, your emphasis seems to be on “nor am I willing to invest the effort”. Not making excuses for the fact that I missed the nuance, but missed it the first time around. Probably was just my state of mind.
Dhananjay
June 23rd, 2011 at 3:41 am
Simple is good, complex is bad. Does that boil it down for you and your friend Viktor?
June 23rd, 2011 at 9:53 pm
How incredibly insightful. Yes, totally worked it out for me and Viktor — thanks for that. That wasn’t the most ridiculous comment I have read today — not at all, not a bit.
July 12th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
I recommend watching “Simplicity ain’t easy” from Stuart Halloway
http://blip.tv/clojure/stuart-halloway-simplicity-ain-t-easy-4842694
It’s exactly about this topic. But by the way there is some difference about the inherent complexity of a subject and the (maybe) additional complexity of someones writing about the subject.
The gap between academic researchers and enterprise developers in expectation of presentation is way to big.
The first expect formulas and concise papers the later one hands-on technology/language specific tutorials.
So don’t be too rude about the people. Show them abstract concepts in concrete examples in their language and they will understand.
Thanks for all your interesting writings.
Florian Over
July 14th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
> Show them abstract concepts in concrete examples in their language and they will understand.
Unfortunately, this is often true. In all seriousness, reasoning about abstract concepts and dealing with complexity are most of what programmers do. Programmers should be able to learn abstract concepts without concrete examples.