HN user

thascales

40 karma
Posts0
Comments12
View on HN
No posts found.
[dead] 15 years ago

But science and the acquisition of knowledge is all about pushing deeper into the implementation. We can't look at something like gravity and say, 'yep, that seems to work fine, adheres to its interface, we don't really need to know how it works, just that it passes its tests (apples fall, helium balloons float above oxygen, etc)'. We can't leave it there, because we have to know the implementation. We'll never improve if we don't. And we still haven't nailed it, but that's no excuse to stop.

It's like a beginning programmer looking at a hash table object and hitting 'view source'. What kind of programmer would he be if he didn't want to see behind the curtain at least once? How could he be expected to excel?

[dead] 15 years ago

It does seem like basing your view of the Universe on 2000-year-old bureaucracy is a recipe for disappointment.

[dead] 15 years ago

It's basically a full stop. Saying 'this is inconsistent, but I trust that it's fine' is basically akin to saying 'I don't want to analyse this any further'. Which, to the non-Christian, is akin to saying 'I think it might fall to pieces if I try to critically analyse it'.