Two interesting articles appeared on the Internet recently:
Paul Graham’s You Weren’t Meant to Have a Boss and Adam Maxwell’s Opinion: The Case Against Writers In The Game Industry.
Both are interesting opinion pieces. They are comprised of a combination of facts, observations, cute-little short stories, and bias. In this regard they aren’t too different from every other article on the Internet.
What makes them similar is that both are targeting a profession and telling them that they shouldn’t be employed. Paul Graham’s article tries to argue [a number of things, but primarily] that it is contrary to human nature if they are employed in a large company. There are specific arguments that ‘programmers’ would benefit from founding a startup instead of working for a large company. Adam Maxwell’s article is telling the game industry that they shouldn’t employ writers, but instead leave the writing responsibility to game designers.
The other way they are similar is that they both received a large amount of feedback within a short period of time. Negative feedback. To be honest, the moment I started reading Paul Graham’s article I went and opened Writer to compose an article titled ‘You are completely wrong: A rebuttal of You Weren’t Meant to Have a Boss’. Whereas, I finished reading Adam Maxwell’s article and thought of posting a comment promoting anti-narrativism and/or ludology.
Still, it is the feedback that is interesting. Adam Maxwell discovered that the easiest way of getting comments is by disparaging people who write for a living. The ironic thing is that most of the responses are poorly written. One comment even accuses the article as being based on a strawman argument. Huh?
THE WHOLE INTERNET SETS UP THE STRAWMAN ARGUMENT!
If that isn’t clear, let me repeat it without shouting: 103.7% of articles on the Internet set up a Straw Man Argument. That doesn’t even include the prevalent amount of ad hominem, equivocation, and existential fallacies one finds. Preliminary estimations place the fallacy rate of the Internet at approximately 3.41 f/kw.*
The high fallacy rate is the primary reason that rational debate is impossible on the Internet. At least in person you have more options since you can always beat up the opposition if their representatives happen to be weaker than you. That lack of that luxury is probably the worst thing about the Internet.
If rational debate was possible, lordpi.com could provide argument for/against both aforementioned articles. Instead of reading how the Internet is horribly flawed due to its lack of interpersonal, physical contact you, our dear readers, would instead be reading how every mortal person was meant to have a boss. In fact, most immortal people also have a boss. If you didn’t have a boss then you’d be a god of some kind. Is that what Paul Graham thinks? That he’s some sort of immortal, spiritual force that we should all revere, sacrifice rams to, and inundate with hot, sexy virgins? We at lordpi.com don’t know much about him, but, to be fair, who wouldn’t want to be inundated with hot, sexy virgins?
Also, if rational debate was possible, then you, our dear readers, would be provided with a reasoned argument supporting certain aspects of Adam Maxwell’s article and discarding the unnecessary points that he added that only confuse the issue. The result would be hundreds of angry comments in response to this article. And each would be filled with fallacies.
To summarize: yes, everyone else on the Internet is wrong because you want them to be. Whatever narrow perspective of the world you grew up with (appeal to belief) or would best benefit your penis (wishful thinking) must be true. If you don’t have a male member at your disposal, I apologize.
* NOTE: lordpi.com would prefer if it was closer to pi, but there is no use arguing with scientific measurements**.
** NOTE: This does not and should not imply that at any point in time a scientific measurement has ever been made or attempted by lordpi.com.