Learn Patterns If Logic Not Found

When you cannot find "good logic" behind something, try WhenInRome instead, and focus on patterns of occurrence. Many of us "techies" prefer solid logic, but in some cases it may not be readily available or visible in a timely manner. Pattern study allows one to JustDoIt and get paid.

Based on material in ValueExistenceProofThree:

Your difficulty with language reminds me of bookkeeping students who get completely hung up on what "debit" and "credit" mean, to the point of being unable to grasp simple concepts because they persist (and perhaps insist) on tripping over what the word implies to them, rather than what it actually means. Note that the term "replace" is not essential; it's more important to recognise that variables are mutable and values are immutable. Whether we call it "replace" or "change" or <whatever> matters not, as long as we understand what it means.

MY difficulty with language? I propose YOU have the difficulty in that you mistake your personal interpretation as a universal truth. And my "values" are not more or less immutable than yours. I'm not entirely sure what your complaint is; you seem to flip flop. Per naming actually used in my model, my "values" don't demonstratively violate such. You appear to be quibbling about some extremely minor and obtuse philosophical nit. As far as your accounting anecdote, I don't know those students or their issues and so cannot comment. Generally as long as one can guess how future accounting coworkers and auditors are likely to label something, that's good enough to get work done. It doesn't matter if they are "wrong" as long as you can predict their classification and match it. It's a form of IoProfile per matching the "output" of people and auditors instead of interpreters. You only have to match them, not philosophically agree with them to get work done and paid. One of the jobs of legal experts is to predict how a judge or jury may interpret a given law. Whether the judge or jury is "right" is moot: one is paid to predict them, not "fix" them. Accountants have similar responsibilities when classifying transactions. If they have a disagreement with how something "should" be classified, they can take it to an accounting association or a professional discussion forum. But don't gum up your current employer's operations by forcing your classification into the existing system/environment when it will create a likely flag (mismatch) with auditors etc.

You appear to have misunderstood my example. The problem with the accounting students who get hung up on what "debit" and "credit" mean is that it inhibits their understanding of bookkeeping and accounting. All that "debit" and "credit" really mean are the left and right hand columns, respectively, of a bookkeeping ledger. Those who try to infer greater meaning to "debit" and "credit" -- such as whether money is being added or subtracted or loaned or deposited or going in or out or whatever -- inevitably wind up confused. Similarly, getting hung up on whether "replace" or "change" or <whatever> is the best term to represent what happens to variables will inhibit understanding rather than helping it.

I'm just trying to analyze your claims, as given in English by you. Careful dissection of the meanings of YOUR words is the only way I know how to analyze your claims. That's all I have to go on with your claims: your words. It's your English glowing there on my screen, nothing else. If terms like "replace" mean something different in "computer science" (cough), then please give the sources and glossaries or usage statistics that back your interpretation of such words. Otherwise, I'll analyze such words based on "everyday life". -t

As far as the accounting confusion, it sounds like those accounting students have a crappy teacher who is not good at explaining accounting. Perhaps a better approach is to have them study large volumes of usage patterns of the terms to get a "feel" based simply on patterns. Like I said above, if you can correctly forecast vocab usage or classification patterns of auditors and future co-workers, it does not matter in a practical sense if one cannot find a OneTruePath definition of accounting terms. -t

WhenInRome, learn and do what the Romans do instead of trying to logically figure out why Romans do what they do. Glutius: "Hey Bob, do you want to go to a crucifixion today? It's a great way to bond with your new coworkers." Bob: "Glutius, sure, I'd love to go!" ;-) If the Romans call pattern X Y Z a "debit", then YOU call it debit too, and nobody will complain and you will get paid. Maybe someday down the road you'll figure out the logic or formula behind such patterns, but get your work done first. -t

ToDo: strip out "value" discussion info (copying to some other source, if applicable).

CategoryEducation