What You Can't Say
This is one of my favorite essays. I like the way Paul Graham writes and the way he thinks. Rather, I like that he thinks very profoundly about what he writes and that this shines through his otherwise mostly colloquial and casual writing. Besides, it references Fight Club and talks about Noam Chomsky and 'Physics vs Literature' all in the same piece!
Needless to say, what I think about the 'Physics vs Literature' part is one of those things we can't say. Yes, really and despite the fact that I love Literature and have tremendous amounts of respect for Professors, students and practitioners of this finest art. ;-)
There isn't much to say about the piece that it doesn't say already. So go read it!
Finally, most other essays on Paul Graham's site also make for very good reading -- well, you may have to be some sort of a nerd to like some (maybe most) of them, but still.
Needless to say, what I think about the 'Physics vs Literature' part is one of those things we can't say. Yes, really and despite the fact that I love Literature and have tremendous amounts of respect for Professors, students and practitioners of this finest art. ;-)
There isn't much to say about the piece that it doesn't say already. So go read it!
Finally, most other essays on Paul Graham's site also make for very good reading -- well, you may have to be some sort of a nerd to like some (maybe most) of them, but still.
posted by rz at 9:07 PM
2 Comments:
Hi Rigole, so I read the essay, thanks for the link, it definitely got me thinking. I might have left it at that but I did promise I would comment on your blog, so here it goes. I agree with, "The statements that make people mad are the ones they worry might be believed". But I'm still contemplating the line that follows this, "I suspect that the statements that make people maddest are those they worry might be true." Historically, I can think of examples and counter examples of this. Maybe I'm missing something. I do think the point about labeling is right on. I would add that it's important to differentiate naming after a group and grouping under a name and then to recognize both as labeling. Then yes, ask why. It's very difficult to avoid labeling, trying is always good as it drives an argument to be more content based. But even the most conscience people label, and often start this moral fashion trend purposefully to stop other moral fashion trends. Now really, which trend is going to be looked back on shockingly? Probably both, and probably both will re-emerge eventually. And this is where speaking vaguely has its faults because you've added oil to the fire of every moral fashion. It's like a horoscope, it always seems to fit you exactly. I liked the essay, (love the writing style), there are points where I would have liked certain counter examples addressed but the thoughts that are introduced are intriguing. And yeah, I really liked all the references made, though I still have to look a couple of them up. (Sha)
"I suspect that the statements that make people maddest are those they worry might be true."
I think that he isn't arguing about the validity of the statement that makes people mad, just about the mechanics of the taboo. We don't have taboos for things that are obviously false, just for those that we are scared could be true.
Post a Comment
<< Home