Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is basically debating semantics.

Bacteria don't 'want' anything in a purely technical sense. But they will eventually develop/are developing resistance to antibiotics anyway. You seem to be stuck in debating about the right sentences to describe that.

That should be least of our worries.



Semantics matter, communication is not possible without agreement on the meaning of words. And the OP made the argument, not me, I'm simply agreeing with his point that's it's wrong to personify evolution, it's why so many people don't understand it.


It's far worse than that. Not on;y is it not possible to have semantic communication without a general agreement on the meaning of words, but at the same time perfect agreement is impossible. This is generally understood (and has been understood for a hundred years) to be one of the causes of linguistic drift.

Humans aren't computers.


No they aren't, which is why it's even more important to make sure we're actually talking about the same things. Semantics matter. I tire of people insisting that I know what they mean when what it's not what they said. I don't read minds, I hear words; the words you choose have meanings and those meanings matter if you want to convey your ideas to me.


> which is why it's even more important to make sure we're actually talking about the same things.

To some extent, but it is also impossible to do so perfectly.

> Semantics matter.

Semantic agreement is limited to the actual parties to the communication, and by location, place, time, and social context. You wouldn't explain something to a 5 year old the way you would a 25 year old and the same basic problems occur when you cross cultural or temporal boundaries.

When linguists discuss language, they usually start by pointing out that human language is defined by usage, not by prescriptions regarding definitions or grammar. This is a critical difference between natural languages and computer languages. Computer languages rigidly conform to specifications. Natural languages only approximate the rules we use to describe them.

So I think you are expecting too much from human communications.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: