The Sapir Whorf hypothesis (language defines what we can perceive and think) is mostly wrong for natural language, but true for programming. Computer languages don't differ in what they can do but in how they let us think.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Cole Hudson Retweeted ☞Cassidy #BlackLivesMatter
Are you familiar with the series of papers on the Piraha? It was a whole thing:https://twitter.com/shapkaa/status/982023915319906304?s=19 …
Cole Hudson added,
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @colejhudson
Yes! After being very puzzled, I mostly chalked them up as outliers: they have only a couple hundred speakers, so the group might have become stuck in a local minimum.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Interesting thought: How would one be able to tell if their own language had become stuck in such a minimum or saddle-point? Just in the same way the Piraha can't discover Einstein's relativity, are there things we can't discover because of language boundaries? How would we know?
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Mostly we discover it a short moment before we extend or correct our language!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.