|
|
|
|
|
by johndoe42377
1964 days ago
|
|
Look, I never tried to be offensive or even bully. But I care about the principle of calling things by its proper names and precise language usage. I am describing things exactly how I see them. And I have reasons to do so. Like so many others I have traveled that road, from Haskell basics up to the latest writings and courses of that self-propelled category theory expert - Bartosz, for whom I have great respect. However, at the end of the journey I came to different conclusions, that the whole subfield is nothing but a sect (the definition is a consensus based group of eager supporters) and the whole set of nested abstractions is empty of meaning, except in producing deeper and deeper nested abstractions. I cold provide analogies with Eastern religious sects, which I have studied too, where abstract things are described in minute details, and the merit is in the knowledge of these minute details, but I won't. It will only complicate this discussion. So I don't see any meaning, and I see socially constructed interested, identical to esoteric teachings, which is even better definition of what Bartosz and others are doing. Let's say it is Hegel all over again. |
|