ch 1 reading response

From this week's reading, I'd like to respond to meta-principle 1.4: expect no more precision than a subject naturally affords. As a CS major primarily occupying spaces that are analytical and data-driven, I think this sentiment is often lost on my peers, and to some degree, myself. The book’s comparison of mathematical rigor vs. philosophical rigor is particularly pertinent here, because things that don’t provide explicitly measurable value are often overlooked. I can even take the example of computer science assignments that are graded on both style and functionality. Since functionality can be measured with automated tests that are applied equally to everyone, those points are optimized and weighted accordingly. Style, on the other hand, is more about aesthetics and clarity, which fall under the sublime. As such, they cannot be graded with as much “precision,” and are not given as much importance. By meta-principle 1.4, this is not a drawback, but rather another framework through which to evaluate. While I do believe that “imprecise” creations are undervalued, I wonder how we can find the correct threshold of precision. Who decides how much precision a subject naturally affords? Does anyone exploit that difference in expectation? My guess is that there can’t be a single answer to these questions, as is the nature of artistic creations. What would the world look like if artful design was valued as much as practical functionality is? I am intuitively led to believe that some creations need not be artful, because they merely need to “get the job done.” However, perhaps I am incorrectly ascribing meaning to artful design. Simplicity can fall under artful design, and optimizing for a sublime experience can never weaken the experience - it by definition enhances it. In that case, why doesn’t everyone optimize also for a sublime experience? Is it out of laziness, or lack of artful design ability? People know what is pleasurable for them to see, and because of that I believe that anyone can design well if they care to and if they think deeply about what they’re making. Therefore, my guess is that it is a combination of a general lack of value for sublime design, and the following lack of motivation to optimize for it. Overall, this principle made me reflect on the culture around the non-analytical valuation of creations, and I have been able to introspect on my own biases towards “rigor.” Design Etude I was struck by Martinelli’s apple-shaped apple juice classes. The delight I felt in realizing that biting the glass sounds exactly like biting into an apple made the design sublime. The hiking trail at Alum Rock Park (right next to where I live) is beautifully designed. I love that the different hiking trails intersect at various locations, so the same people pop in and out of your journey. Last night, I watched Train to Busan with my friends, and I saw many aspects of artful design. The way the makeup artists created the zombies transcended the function -- they were so artistically decorated that they were beautifully scary, which enhanced the entire experience. Chuck Program SinOsc k => dac; while(true) { Math.random2f(300,1000) => k.freq; 100::ms => now; }