Humour, comics, tech, law, software, reviews, essays, articles and HOWTOs intermingled with random philosophy now and then
Filed under:
People and society by
Hari
Posted on Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 17:34 IST (last updated: Fri, Jul 3, 2009 @ 17:54 IST)
I would like to write a bit about how a lot of people in online communities of geeks in general have this inherently flawed notion that their choice of OS (mainly *nix based) is due to their earnest quest for knowledge and understanding and that people who don't choose their OS based on their ideas of knowledge are simply lazy, unwilling to learn or understand.
There is a small grain of truth in their argument in the most restricted and primitive definition of 'learning', but I hasten to add that there are a lot of misconceptions and myths which equate the geek-factor with knowledge and the ability to edit a few miscellaneous configuration files from a command-line terminal following explicit instructions equate to learning. In my humble view, nothing can be further from the truth.
To me, knowledge is a very broad term and learning is a process that furthers knowledge. Merely gathering some information, even highly technical information, does not guarantee better understanding of a subject. It might make you a specialist in a very narrow sense of that word, but nothing more than that.
Blindly learning to execute commmands or programs actually hinders the grasp of knowledge because it keeps you away from the things that really give you knowledge. An extreme example of this would be forcing somebody to learn how to edit a text file using a "geek" editor like vi, ed or emacs. If you feel a compelling urge to show your geekiness that way, it is a process that distracts from the real point of learning something new. If editing a simple text file is something that warrants so much effort, then it is equal to a huge waste of time and effort because there are editors that allow you to do it in a much simpler way without any loss of productivity. On the other hand, learning a text editor because you are genuinely interested in its usage is something different, but I would still argue that it's equally time-wasting as text editors are one of the most re-invented wheels in computing since the invention of the microchip. I find the over-emphasis on using specific tools to accomplish tasks that can be done in other ways ridiculous and narrow-minded. It distracts from the objectives of real learning by focusing too much on the tools used in the process. It places too much emphasis on doing something rather than understanding why it is done. 'Learning' in this way has made such people better at following and memorizing instructions, not given them any real grasp or understanding of the subject of learning.
Similarly if configuring a basic ethernet network connection involves hunting down several text files and many different configuration settings, your learning of basic networking concepts is hindered by your being tied down in minutiae. If anybody claims to be a geek by merely knowing how to configure a network connection in a particular Operating System, that's what I question as a severely flawed concept of learning. Another conception which I find amusing is that doing things the 'hard way' is a part of the learning process, even if that hard way happens to be extremely tedious and repetitively boring. Repeatedly executing a fixed set of tasks is something even a monkey can be trained to do. Hell, that's what computers were created for in the first place! To type ./configure; make; make install does not make an end user any more intelligent unless he actually understands the code itself or at least has some understanding of the theory of compiling and linking.
Of course, learning the nuts and bolts of a system is essential for those who want to make a career of it or maybe those pursuing academic specialization, but for all practical purposes, is that information really going to be of practical use to a hobbyist geek?
I'm not questioning the bona-fides of people who use any particular OS because of their personal preferences and their need to assert their own personality through their choice of OS. We wouldn't be human if we didn't feel a sense of pride or accomplishment upon mastering or at least gaining a new set of skills. We wouldn't be human if we didn't - at least to some extent - identify our personality with the things we frequently use in our lives.
What I DO object to is the sense of arrogance that some people develop because of this flawed conception of 'learning' and 'knowledge' - words they frequently use without fully understanding, a ridiculous personification of an Operating System into an object of love or hate, and the prejudice that anybody who doesn't think in that manner must be lazy, unwilling to 'learn' or simply stupid and worthy only of scorn or pity.
2 comment(s)
I would say that this really depends. Anyone who says that they want to enter the computing world but refuses to learn these things is lazy and deluded. I'm sure that every profession has people who want to lead but have no skills or knowledge. Because computing has become so easy to pick up,professionals have to differentiate themselves somehow from people who merely know how to put a disk in the drive. As well, software or hardware engineers have the built in insecurity because other engineers consider them not proper engineers.
In the end though, it's all self-defeating and pointless.
Comment by ray (visitor) on Sat, Jul 4, 2009 @ 00:24 IST #
"Of course, learning the nuts and bolts of a system is essential for those who want to make a career of it or maybe those pursuing academic specialization, but for all practical purposes, is that information really going to be of practical use to a hobbyist geek?"
Also you know. Arrogance or rudeness is not an answer to other people's lack of knowledge or otherwise. Other people's ignorance shouldn't have to drive anybody to rude or unwarranted outbursts.
Comment by Hari (blog owner) on Sat, Jul 4, 2009 @ 15:27 IST #