Being able to do it properly is what being a skilled artist is all about
Writer, painter, sculpter, they are all trying to take that magnificent unknowable thing and make it fit into a teacup for our enjoyment
...word artist? That's an interesting thought!
Yes, they're called writers. I mentioned them as a first example.
Fucking media literacy is dead, enjoy your block.
that's an unhinged response to a completely innocuous comment
Verbal communication has very limited bandwidth compared to human thought processes. But we've been spending the past few millennia inventing workarounds, like art.
as if verbal communication isn't an art form in itself
It's just the boundary of our thoughts are so much bigger than they were 100k years ago
I was not in any way implying that language cannot be used to create art. Such an assertion would be nonsensical.
This is why I block so many people, did you even take a moment to think before you posted?
Here is what you wrote earlier (emphasis mine):
Verbal communication has very limited bandwidth compared to human thought processes. But we’ve been spending the past few millennia inventing workarounds, like art.
Here is what you wrote now:
I was not in any way implying that language cannot be used to create art.
Do you see any logical problem with this? Nope? I didn't think so.
I mean I understand why you are like this, and it's hardly a problem limited to just you. No one really cares about the meaning of words and just want the emotional payoff from saying them. This ties into the whole 'media literacy is dead' thing, and EVEN WORSE you feel absolutely ZERO twinge of conscience at posting two completely logically incompatible statements
ON TOP OF THAT you're probably even going to consider the fact I called you out on this troublesome to do some other form of harassment or deflecting just like always instead of admitting your fuckup.
username checks out
If I had a dollar for every time someone has said that on lemmy I'd have enough to afford to eat meat this week
Have you tried more words?
Why more word when few do plenty
Can you elaborate?
No
I've tried this. I also use a plethora of additional words, with different and more nuanced meaning, all in an effort to get the exact point across. Problem is: not everyone is rocking an extended vocabulary, so it basically doesn't work most of the time.
I'm trying to re-learn how to be more succinct instead. The key is to zero in on what matters to the audience, and carve out the part they need to hear.
Less really is more.
I don't usually have trouble putting it into words.
Where I run into trouble is putting it into so many words I know damn good and well nobody is going to be able to keep at it, but I'm nowhere close to explaining what I mean, so I just give up and walk off.
Im leaning on the notion that if you can't verbally explain the idea, then you only really understand it in passing or through rote (input/process/output), but you do not actually understand the process at a high enough level to connect it to anything else.
Smart people can do incredible things, but the truly smart can explain analogs of what they do to 6-year olds. Everybody should learn how to teach
You almost admit at the end that putting into words is a skill in its own right. I feel like when you have deep understanding, it can be difficult to put into words. It's like the bell curve meme: first you can't put it into words because you only have a vague idea, than you have a straightforward definition, later you realize it's more complex, has more aspects to it and you again struggle to put it into words
I feel like it's more than that though. Some researchers go too deep into their field that an adjacent one tied to the same goal becomes alien to them (e.g. developmental biology vs pharmacology)
Techies are very good because they own a thorough understanding of the low-level implementation of a tasks requirements, they can tell you exactly how they converted an input to an output down the finest T. But they do not necessarily know how to generalise, they've overtrained and specialised on that specific task that taking it into another context is foreign to them -- i.e., they've learned a task within a specific environment but do not know what the task means outside of it, and in a way... haven't actually learned what the task means.
Project managers (and, in theory, CTO's...) have a high level overview of the task. They might not know how to implement it directly, but they know enough from a conceptual standpoint to extrapolate the task and apply it to different situations and understand the bigger picture that the task takes place in.
My whole argument is that neither the Techie nor the Project manager are masters of the task, because they see the task in different isolated scopes; one from a high level overview and one from a low level implementation.
A Teacher understands both -- what the task is, how to extrapolate it to different situations, and how to implement it
I think I see what you mean. Being able to explain the actual workings of a task or skill shows a much greater depth of understanding about said task or skill, compared to simply performing it.
I would like you to consider the perspective of those who don't speak, those who find the task cognitively overwhelming, those with disabilities or TBIs who have a particular deficit with verbal processing. There are many people who can understand fully well the ins and outs of a task or skill, but be unable to put it into words despite their high level of understanding. They would be able to teach if not for barriers outside of their control. It's important not to write off somebody's intelligence just because they struggle to communicate.
Apologies - it was not my intention to paint those who have difficulty communicating as non-teachers. I myself am not a great verbal communicator, and construct thoughts far better in text than on-demand with sound.
"Verbal" was a poor choice of words in my original comment. I only meant that if you are asked to explain a task you do often through whatever means are available to you, and you are unable to in your own mind create an analog of it to something else, then that is a sign of overtraining
Git gud.
There’s also the fact that BASIC English is a simple singular dimensional language to express an imperialist thought. You’d need a language that experimented with complex and dimensional thoughts in order verbalize thoughts simpletons can conceptualize, if at all.
一路順風
So basically, it's like, consciousness just declares ... any time ... now, so that's why it's like, always now you know?
All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _
