A scientist isn't committed to believing in natural selection in the same way a bibilical literalist is committed to rejecting it.All he's committed to is following the evidence wherever it leads.
A scientist isn't committed to believing in natural selection in the same way a bibilical literalist is committed to rejecting it.All he's committed to is following the evidence wherever it leads.Tags: Starting To Write A BookHelp With Homework Online ChatSolving Algebraic ProblemsHow To Write An Academic Paper For A JournalWhale Hunting EssayParts Of A Proposal Essay
Politics, like religion, is a topic where there's no threshold of expertise for expressing an opinion. Do religion and politics have something in common that explains this similarity?
When people say a discussion has degenerated into a religious war, what they really mean is that it has started to be driven mostly by people's identities.
Because the point at which this happens depends on the people rather than the topic, it's a mistake to conclude that because a question tends to provoke religious wars, it must have no answer.
Within politics, Identity Politics is seen as a search to reconcile concepts of nation and communal identities.
Studies of religion attribute a large part of one's identity to one's beliefs.
Obviously that's false: anything else people make can be well or badly designed; why should this be uniquely impossible for programming languages?
And indeed, you can have a fruitful discussion about the relative merits of programming languages, so long as you exclude people who respond from identity.
For example, the question of the relative merits of programming languages often degenerates into a religious war, because so many programmers identify as X programmers or Y programmers.
This sometimes leads people to conclude the question must be unanswerable—that all languages are equally good.