as someone who observes the interests of theology that has crossed disciplines with computer science, i should only speak from that regard, than as a web developer who puts a dog in the fight of competing styles, insofar as the styles bear ontological commitments. though, obviously the web is suffering in quality due to these dogmatic “software” “engineering” practices, it must be said. there’s a wider tendency to advance metaphors which make certain paradigms more attractive to some developers than others based on philosophical prejudices coming from having accepted aristotle’s agrilogistic axioms (law of noncontradiction, metaphysics of presence, essentialism). computer science is fundamentally ontotheological, not accidental, and engineers who follow martin are committed to a politicization of the object as more real than what objects are about. their style fails to purposefully and meaningfully ground fundamentally distributed applications, necessarily. someone might contrast martin against authors like brian cantwell smith, to see the orientation from which i speak.
greater still, we’re seeing the outcome of what seems like decades of uncritical adoption of practices, what seems more like political movement than properly philosophical argumentation, everywhere in c.s. and wider applications of it.
Isn’t lack of critical thinking and dogmatic adoption practices then the actual problems? Clean code was always one opinionated piece which had critics.
Are there any source to read on Brian Cantwell Smith?
i’d like to think the motivations to think or practice prime our hinge commitments to attune to noopower such that we privatize our lives in spite of the commons. the available motivations, then, would be the actual problems, adoption and qualities of thinking, the symptoms.
bcs’s On the Origin of Objects might make your day.
as someone who observes the interests of theology that has crossed disciplines with computer science, i should only speak from that regard, than as a web developer who puts a dog in the fight of competing styles, insofar as the styles bear ontological commitments. though, obviously the web is suffering in quality due to these dogmatic “software” “engineering” practices, it must be said. there’s a wider tendency to advance metaphors which make certain paradigms more attractive to some developers than others based on philosophical prejudices coming from having accepted aristotle’s agrilogistic axioms (law of noncontradiction, metaphysics of presence, essentialism). computer science is fundamentally ontotheological, not accidental, and engineers who follow martin are committed to a politicization of the object as more real than what objects are about. their style fails to purposefully and meaningfully ground fundamentally distributed applications, necessarily. someone might contrast martin against authors like brian cantwell smith, to see the orientation from which i speak.
greater still, we’re seeing the outcome of what seems like decades of uncritical adoption of practices, what seems more like political movement than properly philosophical argumentation, everywhere in c.s. and wider applications of it.
Isn’t lack of critical thinking and dogmatic adoption practices then the actual problems? Clean code was always one opinionated piece which had critics.
Are there any source to read on Brian Cantwell Smith?
i’d like to think the motivations to think or practice prime our hinge commitments to attune to noopower such that we privatize our lives in spite of the commons. the available motivations, then, would be the actual problems, adoption and qualities of thinking, the symptoms.
bcs’s On the Origin of Objects might make your day.