That's hilarious. I've never noticed philosophers agreeing about anything.
One thing I would question is the necessity of having viewpoints at all about things which aren't connected to some problem in my life. I don't need to take a position about whether triangles are better than octagons, for instance, unless I'm trying to build something out of octagons. Sometimes opinions are necessary, e.g. a physician must make a diagnosis, but on the whole progress depends upon solving problems and not upon debating them. Furthermore, the best way to persuade others you have solved a problem is to ignore them and use your solution to make further progress.
> the best way to persuade others you have solved a problem is to ignore them and use your solution to make further progress.
While I don't generaly recommend doing this with superiors at work, it got me a promotion once.
I was a middle level developer and was tasked with building the authentication layer of our monolithic application.
Our team lead insisted that I created a microservice for that for "futureproofness sake". I argued that keeping the code inside our monolith would have many benefits like shaving dev time and being simpler to mantain.
By chance the CTO was nearby, got interested in our discussion, and gave me the choice as long as I could deliver the promisses and demonstrate the benefits.
I went home and wrote the authentication layer in a sleepless night. It was finished next day, included some tests and the code was trivial to understand.
A month later my team lead was downgraded and transfered to another team (he left the company not long after) and I was promoted to team lead senior dev.
Be careful when pulling stuff like this because often your superior has more experience and does know better.
In my case the team lead was a bit too much hype driven and it resulted in his downfall.
I love that. It seems to me that people around me can be so tunnel visioned and obsessed with micro services which in the end just creates so much complexity and it will be just much more difficult to maintain and debug in the future.
>That's hilarious. I've never noticed philosophers agreeing about anything.
Reminds me of a quote by Leon Battista Alberti:
"All disunited and of various opinions, philosophers are nevertheless in agreement in that each of them holds all the other mortals for demented and imbeciles."
That's hilarious. I've never noticed philosophers agreeing about anything.
One thing I would question is the necessity of having viewpoints at all about things which aren't connected to some problem in my life. I don't need to take a position about whether triangles are better than octagons, for instance, unless I'm trying to build something out of octagons. Sometimes opinions are necessary, e.g. a physician must make a diagnosis, but on the whole progress depends upon solving problems and not upon debating them. Furthermore, the best way to persuade others you have solved a problem is to ignore them and use your solution to make further progress.