Those who don't recognize value and those who don't recognize diminishing value.

• A “X is worth it!”
• B (Yes, it’s worth it. Not as much as it used to be.)
• C “X is no longer worth it!”
• B (No, the value has gone down, but “not” is an overstatement. It should be something like “not as valuable as it once was…“)
• A “Anyone who says X is worthless wants to pretend that X is worthless because they don’t understand it.”
• B (See, C said something radical, so A started saying something radical too…)

The concepts “diminished value” and “value still exists” are compatible, but they are converted to “no value” or “value remains the same,” making them incompatible.

• A series of pictures of two people saying different things

@sugimoto_kei: Maybe today, knowledge is tied to social hierarchy Maybe today, knowledge is too much tied to social hierarchy. So, frankly saying “I don’t understand” about something important is taken as a statement of weakness/incompetence. By the person more than by anyone else. This is not an intellectual attitude. Intellectual inquiry starts with Admit you don’t know what you don’t know.

• So far, so good.

@sugimoto_kei: maybe at the heart of this “object-oriented controversy”. I think this is what is at the heart of this “object-oriented controversy”. You are uncomfortable with the situation where object-oriented is talked about as somehow important, but you don’t really understand it. So you want to deny that object orientation is “no longer” important.

• I thought this was odd.

@nishio: like so much other technical knowledge, “over time it has become less important than it used to be” I thought it would be a clash of two extremes: those who say it is “no longer valuable” and those who say it is “as valuable as in the past”. @nishio: The assertion that “one would want to pretend that what is valuable has not changed in value out of fear that what is valuable has not been acquired. The claim that “you want to pretend that something of value has not changed out of fear that you have not acquired it” is easily inverted to “you want to pretend that something of value has not changed out of fear that what you have acquired will diminish in value. @nishio: I totally agree with “it’s important to admit that you don’t know what you don’t know”, but It’s a distorted perception to use “you don’t understand the value of A” against someone who estimates the value of A less than you do and not use “I may not understand the factors that make A less valuable”.

relevance - Generalize and attack conspicuously inferior people. - Hit me with a bigger subject. This is a little off. - [They retaliate with a shotgun attack.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/価値を認めない人と価値の減少を認めない人 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.