29 Apr
2011
29 Apr
'11
12:03 p.m.
On 4/28/11 3:24 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
And just who decides that said gang of peopole know what they are talking
about? I can see an infinite regress about to start :-)
Nah, don't look at it in a suitly way. Our society works VERY VERY
I don't think that suits would understand what is meant by 'infinite
regress' :-)
My comment was intended mostly in jest. I may be mostly a hardware
person, but I do find formal logic to be interesting. And that includes
various forms of recursive defintion and whether they actually terminate.
What is an 'informal qualification'?
Simple: A gang of people who know what they're talking about,
asserting that YOU know what you're talking about. HARD to try to "tune out" intuitive
knowledge and replace everything
with so-called "facts" printed on paper. We've worked with people who
Yes, and it sounds like we're both unhappy about that.
have a piece of paper that asserts that they know what
they're talking
about, while we know that they really don't, and vice-versa.
Indeed :-(
In my
not-commonly-shared-but-still-strongly-held opinion, it's the
only qualification that matters.
I will crtainly agree that it is possible to be self-taught, and that
said 'teaching' can go to a very high level. Just becase you haven't got
a bit of paper saying you know<foo> does not mean that you know nothing
about<foo> or, indeed, that yuou know less about<foo> than people with
said bit of paper.
[No, I am not claiming any of that applies to me...]