[Jtsummers]

> I guess that is my point; all of the languages I know are of the same paradigm, but I need to know them all for work. So I disagree with the assertion that only languages of a different paradigm from the one you know is worth learning.

I think you're taking that statement too literally, and way too seriously. Many of the epigrams are a bit tongue in cheek, and that one is too.

https://gwern.net/doc/cs/algorithm/1982-perlis.pdf - Full list as a PDF

127 is instructive here:

> 127. Epigrams scorn detail and make a point: They are a superb high-level documentation.

Don't take them literally and act like they're gospel truths you must live your life by. That's not what Perlis was going for with them. Just like you shouldn't take DRY (don't repeat yourself) literally. You should use judgement.

If you need to learn Fortran to write your numeric code, even though Fortran isn't teaching you anything, you should learn Fortran. You have a job to do. But if you don't need to learn Fortran for work, and it has nothing to offer over the other languages you know, why bother with it? That's the key point of the epigram.