From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 11cae8,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid11cae8,public From: adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/17 Message-ID: <5957to$18h@krusty.irvine.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 204503602 references: <32AA207E.3199@deep.net> <32B3F45C.5140@deep.net> organization: /z/news/newsctl/organization newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lnag.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <32B3F45C.5140@deep.net> tansel@deep.net writes: >Not only being an OO trainer, but a motivational trainer, I would have >to disagree here. Every training should include a motivational >component. I totally agree that knowledge and skill are paramount. The >important thing is to be able to excite people to get this knowledge and >skill. The teacher is as good as he or she can motivate the participants >to eagerly accept what he or she is offering. One of the reasons that >children learn OO quickly is they are so easily excitable. The moment >you show them something, that becomes the most important thing on Earth. >But for the grown ups (or as they are labeled by children: "given ups") >a big dose of motivation is required to grab their attention. "Every training should include a motivational component"??? This is probably true for trainings that are likely to include a bunch of unmotivated people who don't want to be there and are in the training only because their boss is making them and who were hoping to go through the rest of their lives making money by doing the same thing over and over without having to learn anything new. Hopefully, I wouldn't have any such people working for me. I also wouldn't want employees who are able to get so excited that they would "eagerly accept" what a teacher is teaching them; I'd prefer those who are smart enough to look at the material analytically, so that they would understand when, how, and why to apply it. [By the way, I'm speaking as someone who spent a lot of time and money in the past in courses that could be called "motivational" or "self-development" seminars. While they did me a world of good, my experiences have convinced me that the practice of exciting trainees so that they accept things eagerly (and unquestioningly) has great potential for harm as well as for good.] Finally, does anyone else feel insulted by Tansel's post? There seems to be an undercurrent that those who don't believe in OO as fervently as he does [I'm assuming Tansel is a "he"] are unmotivated, have "given up", don't want to learn anything new, are "followers", etc. This seems like it would be insulting to many truly professional engineers. -- Adam