Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!rice!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) Newsgroups: comp.edu Subject: Re: Against educational fads Message-ID: <26567:Dec1403:56:2390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Date: 14 Dec 90 03:56:23 GMT References: <9426:Dec1315:38:2390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Organization: IR Lines: 76 In article harkcom@potato.pa.Yokogawa.Co.jp (Alton Harkcom) writes: > In article <9426:Dec1315:38:2390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> > brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: > =}Writing skills are generally more important than typing skills. If this > =}isn't a fact, what is? > For the 'educated' portion of the population who will have to present > ideas which can be interpreted by others, it is important. This includes scientists, businessmen, etc. > For the vast > majority of people who will never need to write much more than there name > and an occasional shopping list, yet will have to deal with the coming > computer age to survive, it is not so important. I agree with everything except the ``yet'' clause. Do you seriously believe that T. C. Mits cares one whit about typing? > To those people, writing > skills (creative, not copying) would be considered less important than > than typing skills. Absolutely not. The largest class of people for whom typing is of the most importance is secretaries, and there are many more businessmen and scientists than secretaries. > In article <8470:Dec1313:48:5190@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> > brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: > =}No, it wouldn't. Programming experience does not substitute for writing > =}experience. The latter is far more important in the real world. > =}(My cynical side says that neither an ``interactive timeline'' nor a > =}history term paper is much more than an exercise in bull, but at least > =}writing bull is more of an intellectual challenge than coding it.) > Programming experience does not substitute for writing experience, > but that does not make writing better then programming. You continue with this idea that programming is actually important to a noticeable percentage of the population. What world do you live in? > (But a quick glance at most documentation shows that writing > skills weren't 'studied' as hard as programming skills were. Myself > included ;-) Huh? Are you actually admitting that writing skills are even important for (gasp) programmers? > In article <8619:Dec1314:03:4290@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> > brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: > =}Hopefully not. It is hellishly useful to organize revisions into > =}separate drafts. > I find it quite a burden to keep revisions in seperate drafts. Fine, that's your problem. For the rest of us, Strawman and friends will remain useful abstractions. > I agree that typing skills do not dimish the importance of good writing > skills. I also believe that good writing skills do not diminish the > importance of good typing skills. They both have their importance and > IMHO are equally important to the majority of the people (with writing > skills taking the lead in the 'rat race') Are you in touch? It's not a rat race. It's not even close. > =}Russell's analogy: An air conditioner can push Texas driving over the > =}threshold between a pain and a joy. So what? That doesn't diminish the > =}importance of driving well---and good driving requires a brake, not an > =}air conditioner. > But Russell's analogy fails!?! Hardly. The minor differences you point out do not affect the form of the analogy, which is: ``Convenience can push Action over the threshold between a pain and a joy. So what? That doesn't diminish the importance of [learning to do] Action well.'' I sure hope you understand that mere conveniences pale beside essentials. ---Dan