• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How can you be passionate about something and not know anything about it?

D

Descartes

Lifer
I sent a girl friend of mine a link to that article about Britney Spears not knowing who Yoko Ono is. It turned into a big argument about me being arrogant thinking that everyone should know what I think they should know. I said, that if someone perpetuates a perception of being passionate about something, that there are certain things that people should know. My examples (she's a coworker, and I'm a developer, so these examples made sense)...

If you're a Perl programmer, you know what "the camel book" is, and you know who Larry Wall is. If you don't, how the hell could you really be a Perl programmer? You may hack out a few lines of code, but you haven't spent much time really learning about your language.

If you're a Java programmer, you know who James Gosling is. How could you not?

If you're a C programmer, you know what the K and the R in K&R mean, and you know their names. More likely than not, you have read K&R, and might even still own a copy. There are *constant* references to K&R in the C world, so if you've never even heard of it, your background is questionable.

If you're a Windows programmer, you've probably at least *heard* of Petzold, if not read him.

If you do MFC, you at least know of Prosise.

If you've done any research into Windows internals, you know/read Richter.

I offered many more arguments, not all relating to development, but it was shortly after that point that I somehow gave off an arrogant vibe, consequently leaving me talking to myself. Am I way off base? I think it's this way with anything. If you're interested and involved in something, you'll always pick up idioms that only someone else of the same interest would understand. This may not be a way to immediately disqualify someone as being truly a pundit, but it definitely gives a heads up.

Sorry for the long post. Thoughts?
 
I question the validity of your examples.

At work I do a bit of SQL programming. We need a procedure, function, etc that does this and/or that I can write it. I don't know the history of SQL or who designed it or any authors of SQL books - nor do I care. My ignorance of these matters doesn't make me any less of a programmer.

I'm no expert, nor do I need to be for the work I do.
 
If you're passionate about C++, you need to know C++. That's all you need to know. You don't need to know about some guy who happened to write some C++ book which happens to be popular. This sort of information is really quite tangential to C++ the programming language. It is perfectly possible to become quite an expert at C++ without having read, or without having even heard of, some book which just happens to be popular with a lot of other people who have learned C++.

Now, you could argue as to whether you would need to know the creator of C++ if you are passionate about C++. I would say no. C++ is a programming language and someone passionate about C++ is someone who is passionate about programming in that language. Historical / bibliographic information has nothing to do with the discipline of programming. It too is quite tangential.

If you're passionate about Britney Spears' music, you don't have to know her life story. You just have to like her music a lot, seek it out on many occasions, and so on.

Think along these lines, and you will see that you are wrong. You are confusing passion with obsession.
 


<< I note that passion is often a substitute for knowledge.😉 >>



exactly, they're not necessarily the same.
 
Descartes: are you saying that Spears is passionate about music then she should know all about music? if so, since when is Britney passionate about music? i don't remember reading or hearing anything about it. she is gifted with a sex appeal, can sing, so she is marketed as a pop music artist. i agree that if you are passionate about something then you should know a lot about it. but most people aren't passionate about their jobs and i HIGHLY doubt that Britney is really deep down passionate about her music career. if she didn't make any money at it do you think she would still do it?
 


<< If you're passionate about C++, you need to know C++. That's all you need to know. You don't need to know about some guy who happened to write some C++ book which happens to be popular. This sort of information is really quite tangential to C++ the programming language. It is perfectly possible to become quite an expert at C++ without having read, or without having even heard of, some book which just happens to be popular with a lot of other people who have learned C++.

Now, you could argue as to whether you would need to know the creator of C++ if you are passionate about C++. I would say no. C++ is a programming language and someone passionate about C++ is someone who is passionate about programming in that language. Historical / bibliographic information has nothing to do with the discipline of programming. It too is quite tangential.

If you're passionate about Britney Spears' music, you don't have to know her life story. You just have to like her music a lot, seek it out on many occasions, and so on.

Think along these lines, and you will see that you are wrong. You are confusing passion with obsession. >>



I think you're entirely wrong, but that's my opinion. My examples may not have fully exemplified the issue being discussed, but perhaps my point needs further qualification...

A C programmer not knowing of K&R is like an English major never having read Shakespeare. It's like a marketing person not knowing the "4 P's" of marketing. What you're telling me, is that someone well versed in C++ may not know who Stroustrup is. That's like someone saying they're into quantum mechanics but don't know the works of Einstein. That's like a mathematician never hearing of G&ouml;del. That's like an online junkie who doesn't know what "LOL" means. That's like an ATOT'er who doesn't know what a "nef" is. That's like saying you've been on these forums since the beginning but don't even know who Anand Lal Shimpi is. Enough analogies. If you have reached a pinnacle of understanding in your niche, there are certain things/people/books/references/idioms/etc. you know, period.
 


<<

A C programmer not knowing of K&R is like an English major never having read Shakespeare. It's like a marketing person not knowing the "4 P's" of marketing. What you're telling me, is that someone well versed in C++ may not know who Stroustrup is. That's like someone saying they're into quantum mechanics but don't know the works of Einstein. That's like a mathematician never hearing of G&ouml;del. That's like an online junkie who doesn't know what "LOL" means. That's like an ATOT'er who doesn't know what a "nef" is. That's like saying you've been on these forums since the beginning but don't even know who Anand Lal Shimpi is. Enough analogies. If you have reached a pinnacle of understanding in your niche, there are certain things/people/books/references/idioms/etc. you know, period. >>


i have no idea what the four "p's" of marketing are and i work in marketing. maybe its just because i am not passionate about my job. i just to work to make money. most people aren't passionate about their jobs, it is just a way to make the money they need to support them in being passionate about their hobbies.
 
I would think being passionate about your field includes the desire to expand your knowledge in the field and to constantly be well informed about all aspects of it.
 


<< i have no idea what the four "p's" of marketing are and i work in marketing. maybe its just because i am not passionate about my job. i just to work to make money. most people aren't passionate about their jobs, it is just a way to make the money they need to support them in being passionate about their hobbies. >>



That was probably a poor example. I got that one from a marketing buddy of mine who said it comes up a lot where she works.



<< I would think being passionate about your field includes the desire to expand your knowledge in the field and to constantly be well informed about all aspects of it. >>



Exactly.
 
Same reason why most people are opinionated about cars even though they don't know anything about it except what they read in magazines.
 
Well,

I'm looking at the C++ example and partially agreeing / partially disagreeing. I look at it this way: When I am passionate about a computer language, I usually want to get right into it and try to do as much as I can, falling back on help sites when I get in a jam. I barely ever come across any history / etc.

Knowing this, I think a better phrase would be, "If you are passionate about something, it is likely that at one point or another you will learn the who, what, why, and where". I may not know who Larry Wall is, since I just got into perl, but if I continue with it and am very passionate about it, sooner or later I will probably learn about him.

So instead of being suprised that Britney Spears didn't know who Yoko Ono is, I would be more suprised if she didn't care to know who he is. Just like if you were writing Perl, you would want someone to say "I think you might want to read about this guy, Larry Wall" and not "HAHAHA YOU DON'T KNOW WHO LARRY WALL IS?!?" Also, You have to ask yourself how much time Britney Spears has and how not knowing Yoko Ono affects her life or her job at all.

You have to remember, shes a puppet who just gets told when to jump, I don't think her job requires much thinking / researching on her part.
 
Sorry, I don't care how many comparisons anyone tries to make. That she did not know who Yoko Ono was is just plain pathetic. That she didn't know who Linda McCartney was is completely, outrageously pathetic.
 


<< A C programmer not knowing of K&R is like an English major never having read Shakespeare. >>



This is horribly Eurocentric and horribly wrong. There are thousands of excellent programmers in Russia, China, India, and other non-American non-European countries (Russia is a borderline case) where people barely speak English, barely earn a living wage, have nowhere near the amount of money to blow on overpriced books written by Americans or Europeans, but can outprogram you and any of your friends with their eyes closed. They are self-taught, taught by local professors, or have read locally produced documentation.

Once again, historical / bibliographic information is tangential to the discipline of programming. You are speaking from the position of a naive American who assumes that the entire world must revolve around the US.
 


<< This is horribly Eurocentric and horribly wrong. There are thousands of excellent programmers in Russia, China, India, and other non-American non-European countries (Russia is a borderline case) where people barely speak English, barely earn a living wage, have nowhere near the amount of money to blow on overpriced books written by Americans or Europeans, but can outprogram you and any of your friends with their eyes closed. They are self-taught, taught by local professors, or have read locally produced documentation. >>



Thanks first for making assumptions about my skill level. I still think you're horribly wrong. K&R is by no means overpriced 🙂 I still highly doubt that they're not aware of at least who K&R are...



<< Once again, historical / bibliographic information is tangential to the discipline of programming. You are speaking from the position of a naive American who assumes that the entire world must revolve around the US. >>



Are you bitter or what? You're looking at it superficially. I admit my examples were more appropriate for Americans, but the same idea holds true for all. I can't speak for Russia, or China, thus my more American references.
 
Hon', you are plain wrong here. Your analogy is completely weak and simply begs the question. Here's why that is so: It is quite telling fom your argument that you intertwine the word "passion" with "well-versed" or "knowledge". That is plain wrong and mistaken. One who is passionate about something is not necessarily well-versed in it. I learned that a long time ago at elementary school and high school.

At high school, I had a great friend whom whenever I asked her favourite subject she would say maths. But she was in my maths class and wasn't quite good at the subject. If I'm not mistaken she in fact needed tutoring for her maths class. Contrast that with students who were excellent in mathematics but were not passionate about it. I wondered how that was possible. It does happen.

I myself was quite passionate about maths of all subjects in elementary school. I struggled with a great passion to excel at maths of all subjects. It didn't seem to improve that much despite my passion. Eventually of course, when I studied the material of 3 classes ahead of me, I got to the level I desired.

Point in case was that passion is not necessarily interchangeable with knowledge. What passion does is motivate you to seek and acquire knowledge on something or someone.

Here's why that is so, I think: passion is an element of abstract objects consisting of components that interact beyond my comprehension at least. When you think of passion, you think of just "feelings" . . . irrational most of the time at least . . . like "love". People sometimes generate passion from the notion of jumping on the bandwagon . . . 'cuz everyone loves x, everyone is into x, everyone speaks of x, so I don't comprehend x or know much about x, but I'm generating this feeling that is rather intertwined with my interactions with people--not x, but the result is that I have passion for x. On the other hand, knowledge is that which is obtainable or obtained (don't ask me for a straight definition! That's just a property I state). It possibly and in most cases involves some concrete objects, sensory perception and the human brain that processes it.

Does that now make sense to you how someone could be passionate about something but not knowledgeable of or well-versed in it? It makes no sense at the surface . . . intuitively, that is, but when you try processing an explanation, you can see why, I think. 😉

P.S.: Britney Spears is so young, so I would not dare oblige her to know a man generations ahead of her. What's up with that? What is she to have learned from him?
rolleye.gif
😛 What does knowing who he is do to her life rather than a general history of that era?
 


<< Are you bitter or what? You're looking at it superficially. I admit my examples were more appropriate for Americans, but the same idea holds true for all. I can't speak for Russia, or China, thus my more American references. >>



Documentation is local. Programming is global / universal.

You have yet to explain why people from non-American and non-European countries should have to use, or should have to know anything about, non-local documentation.
 


<< You have yet to explain why people from non-American and non-European countries should have to use, or should have to know anything about, non-local documentation. >>



Stay on topic. I just agreed with you and said my examples were more localized, because I can't speak for the others. What I did say, was that no matter what language, interest, or area of study, there will always be little esoteric aspects that only those who are truly pundits will understand. There are idioms of the C language that are universal, and only those well-versed would acknowledge them. Again, the same holds for other languages, other areas of interest, etc.

Simple as that.
 


<< Here's why that is so: It is quite telling fom your argument that you intertwine the word "passion" with "well-versed" or "knowledge". That is plain wrong and mistaken. One who is passionate about something is not necessarily well-versed in it. I learned that a long time ago at elementary school and high school. >>



Semantics. I call these people fanatics. My idea of passion, is the man/woman that is often overwhelmed with excitement when speaking on their subject to others, someone who is excited to learn as much as is absolutely possible about their subject, and someone who profoundly understands their subject.

If you want to see an example of said passion, watch some of the programs on the Discovery Science channel. Some of these physicists/cosmologists/astronomers get so excited talking about it that they can hardly contain themselves. To me, they are passionate.

But again, lets not argue semantics. My perception of "passionate" may differ from yours. I've expounded in my reply to yellowplastic...
 


<< there will always be little esoteric aspects that only those who are truly pundits will understand. There are idioms of the C language that are universal, and only those well-versed would acknowledge them. Again, the same holds for other languages, other areas of interest, etc.

Simple as that. >>



Are you saying that there are no C experts in China, India, and other non-European countries?

How arrogant is this?

You are conflating your Americanized C culture with some ideal, global C culture. This is offensive to me.

Being a C expert means you program in C very well, efficiently, etc. It does NOT mean that you know of American or European people who happened to write C documentation. It does NOT mean that you know of stupid little idioms that American C programmers use.
 
"How can you be passionate about something and not know anything about it?"


LOL, a quick read thru a lot of the religious and political threads here would show you that this is a
lot more common than you think
rolleye.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top