Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language)

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
:>I do not want to undermine craftsmanship. Sometimes engineers work
:>as craftspeople and vice versa. Sometimes craftspeople have domain
:>knowledge superior to engineers', and vice versa. Sometimes both
:>know much/little about related sciences that might even be unkown
:>to the scientists.
: 
: No engineer cannot know more than a scientist, because any engineer is
: a scientist when he/she *knows* something.
: 
: Craftspeople may only have practical experience, be trained etc, but
: not know. When alchemists started to know, they became chemists.

If I understand the rules of your rhetorics game correctly,
a craftsperson becomes a scientist as soon as he or she knows
something? Or do they become engineers?
Like the stone carvers and master masons in the late middle ages
who had learned geometry, languages, etc., and did experiments?

What good is there in calling a craftsman an engineer because
he happens to be a craftsman who knows something? He might
take pride in being a craftsman *and* in knowing something.
He might not want to be called an engineer.

: Science and arts are stagnating and highly unpopular.

How do you measure this? I find it hard to believe that
you measure evolving science by the number of years it
takes to invent an improved vehicle.

 
:>: It can, but why should everything depend on lobbying?
:>
:>It shouldn't. Can you name an alternative?
: 
: No. But if someone could, would you be ready to accept any?

Any in the sense of just about any no matter what?
It is of no importance what I would accept. If people
see an alternative to lobbying, it is likely that some will
adopt it if it seems rewarding.

 
-- Georg