By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
danasider on 18 May 2015
Edit Thread
Shackkobe said:

I implied the potential of one's mind to expand if forced to take on different subject matter and allow oneself to be vulnerable.  It won't happen with everyone, and personally I feel that if they get burnt out and start hating the process of writing or developing for new subject matters, then they shouldn't continue to be forced to.  It could be enlightening for some however in small amounts.  They don't even have to put them into practice; just being exposed to them a little (books, movies) and they can take or leave what they want within those new ideas.

I wouldn't want them to end up hating their profession.

You are a bit clearer now.

Sometimes we are not aware how we come across.

I think it's only you who aren't aware of how you are coming across.

Your conclusion that the developers being narrowminded is an implication of the premise stating their minds/perspectives are broadened simply is not valid logic. It's a personal assumption yes, but the action where a perspective is broadened does not definitively dictate what the initial state of the mind was.

If the developer was killed, that would imply that he or she was alive in the first place because the state of life is binary. You either are living or you're dead.

However, the broadness of something is relative and it lies on a spectrum. A doorway can be more broad than another doorway and the doorway's broadness is relative to the person walking through the doorway.

So the correct implications would be both that a narrow mind was made less narrow OR an open mind was made more open (the perspective broadened further) -- not one or the other. Because of this, you are wrong to accuse the post of claiming such developers of essentially being narrowminded. It could have meant either or and there'd be know way to prove one implication more valid than the other without further information.

Sorry to nitpick but your last sentence came off a smug despite you arriving at an incorrect conclusion (your biased assumption of what the post meant). This is why internet debates end badly so often. And of course, it's prevalent for the person with the bad sense of logic to try and blame/shame the other poster for not being clear.