"Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur." (translation: "Anything said in Latin sounds profound")

Quotation is a funny thing.

Just take a look at my profile and you will see that I am a fan.  I even wrote a series of entries (here, here, here, & here) based entirely on the significance I found in certain quotations.  Some I find inspiring, others enlightening, and some simply amusing.  I've got hundreds lying around that are significant to me in some way.  But why these short snippets?  Why so much emphasis on the wisdom of a few phrases?

Some people get irritated when I recite quotes to them.  They cry, almost reflexively, that a quote does not constitute an argument.  Fully granted!  But what use are they, then?  I don't pretend to have a complete answer to this question, but I can tell you a few reasons I might include one in a discussion.

1. Most importantly, there are some things that certain people have said which simply express a concept far more simply and elegantly than my abilities are able to generally muster.  For example - I really, really like Roderick Long's summation of libertarianism as "Other people are not your property."  This is about as simple and imprecise as you can get, but it expresses in six words a whole bundle of concepts which it would take me chapters to express otherwise.  Yes, it relies on preconceived notions about property, and it does not offer a why.  But that can all be resolved.  This is the Libertarianism Elevator Pitch.
   
   
2. Quotes can be pointers to a larger body of supportive evidence.  No, the quote itself is not what is important - but I might say, "Look, this is what Mises concludes after 100 pages of exposition.  Here is a link also to that exposition, so you can read it for yourself, but this is the meat."  I might especially use this tactic when arguing in a field that is outside my expertise; it involves an implicit appeal to authority, to be certain, but such an appeal is not wholly unwarranted if there is further evidence to back it up.  For example, I might quote the conclusions of a particular medical study or other without inserting the entire body of the study.
   
   
3. Boldness.  I'll admit it, I feel more comfortable citing radical things said by people more famous than I am.  For example, the brave H. L. Mencken wrote: "The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's good-by to the Bill of Rights."  Coming from me, most people would probably back away as if I were a lunatic.  But quoting a rather sardonic journalist from the early 20th century, there is some distance between the quoter and the quotee.  Even if I agree with Mencken here (which I do - in the metaphorical sense, of course), the quotation demonstrates that I'm not the only loony who thinks this way.
   
   
4. Simple appeal to authority.  Yes, yes, not the best reason, but we are all guilty of it from time to time.  It is a lot easier to pull a quote from a respected person out of the air than a complete argument, and that's an easy crutch to abuse.  In particular, one sees this often with the Founding Fathers - so many people have such instant respect for the likes of Jefferson, Madison, Adams, and their ilk that anything from their mouths become instant gospel.  Second amendment buffs particularly seem to fall prey to this fallacy, so it's something we have to watch out for.
   
   Of course, not all appeals to authority are so bad.  In particular, as a Christian, I have no problem citing verse to support my argument with other Christians (or Jews, if we're talking Old Testament).  But the Bible is, for most Christians, an unimpeachable authority - so this tactic is usually acceptable in this range of arguments.

All things considered, I don't think it should be that controversial. No, a quote should not be allowed to stand alone too often (though they do make such good bookends for an article!). No, they do not usually count as an argument by themselves.  But there is value in what has been written through the ages by people more intelligent - or, at least, more eloquent - than most of us.  If nothing else, they serve as useful points for meditation; an exercise for the mind to puzzle out all of the assumptions and implications of what has been said.  At their worst, they can be vicious - as with many religious peoples' selective reading of their religious texts.  But at their best, they can be truly inspiring; a point of view, simply expressed, opening a realm of previously unexplored avenues of thought in but a few sentences.  Words, in the pen (or throat) of a master, are power.

"The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do." --Thomas Jefferson

"I have gathered a posie of other men’s flowers, and nothing but the thread that binds them is mine own." --John Bartlett

Tags: geekery, rant
Current Mood: thoughtful

Math geekery ahead...

So, I wasted a ridiculous amount of time this week on Polymath's blog arguing mostly with math illiterates over the fact that .999... = 1.  As of right now, the comment count for that post and the three follow-ups comes out to 762, involving probably around 50 people.  Of course, this is probably because the story was farked.

It really is a very simple problem, and I've only ever had one math person I respect disagree with me on it (and that conversation was short, so I can't say why), but it seems to really offend many peoples' sensibilities for some reason.  There are so many different ways to prove it, however, that I really can't fathom how anyone can reasonably deny it.  So, since the doubters in polymath's comments couldn't find any way to really disprove his proofs, they began resorting to ever more bizarre claims - including denying that 1/3 = 0.333... and doubting the validity of all of mathematics because of this one break from their intuition!  I actually had to prove that "1/3 = 0.333..." to one commenter; I'm reproducing that proof in a cut here just because I couldn't format it correctly in the comments.

( proof )

One can actually use a very similar proof to demonstrate the point of contention; see "The real proof" here.  But one doesn't even have to go that far, because it's really simpler than any huge math proofs.  It has to do with the nature of real numbers.  See, real numbers are a continuous set - between any two real numbers, by definition, there are infinite other real numbers.  Between 0.1 and 0.2, for example, there are 0.100001, 0.100002, 0.199998, etc.  Between 0.999... and 1.000..., however, there are NO numbers.  If one subtracts 0.999... from 1, there is no number one can get other than 0.  So since there are no numbers between them, they are equal by definition.

Now, many people at this point resort to creating their own notation and try to posit that 1 - 0.999... = 0.000...1.  But this number is both incorrect notation and a meaningless figure - the ellipses indicate an INFINITE set of zeros.  How can you have a 1 at the end of an endless series?  You can't, otherwise the series would be finite.

Other people try to say that 0.999... approaches 1.  These people are thinking of asymptotic functions, such as f(x) = 1/x, wherein f(x) approaches but never actually reaches zero.  But this is a mistake, because 0.999... is not a function - it is a number.  A single number.  It doesn't approach anything; f(x) = 0.999... is just a horizontal line.

If you have a math background and you disagree with polymath's analysis or mine, I encourage you to comment on why you disagree.

Tags: geekery, math, rant
Current Mood: geeky

I had lots of dreams about programming in Lisp this morning...all about things like caching sql queries and stuff...

Kind of scary.

Tags: dreams, geekery, life, tech
Current Mood: weird

All right, to reaffirm my geekiness (and not simply my political-ness), and since I know some of you are fellow World-of-Warcrack-heads, I invite the teeming hordes that are my LJ friends to join our wonderful new (Alliance) WoW guild on the Garithos server, <Tavern of Lost Souls>:

(yes, that image took me a ridiculously long time to create, even with a stolen foundation - I'm no graphic artist, just a programmer)

The guild was mostly for me and my friends, but anyone who is interested is welcome.  We even have a Teamspeak server...for when we're not all lowbies and can actually do some raids.  Send a whisper to Exitialis or comment with your character's name and I'll invite you.  Ask us about our Instant-Level-Five Technique.

Tags: games, geekery, life, people, wow
Current Mood: geeky

Who is coming? You will comment, and you should call me.

The plan:
Our usual theater, Century Stadium 25 (1701 W Katella Ave, Orange, CA 92867), has a showing at 10:30pm.  You should buy your tickets in advance on Fandango.com ASAP, just in case it sells out (it's not a huge movie, but this is opening night after all, who knows).  We should get to the theater at least by 10:00pm to get good seats.

We may go to dinner at JT Schmid's first, which is just down the street from the theater on Katella.  If we do so, we will meet there around 7:30 or 8:00, and you should let me know in advance if you are coming so I can reserve the right number of seats.  If you just want to meet us for the movie and skip dinner, that is fine too, just let me know.

Feel free to call my cell phone about questions or concerns you may have, or to let me know you are coming.  If you don't have my cell number, leave a comment and I will get it to you.

Tags: entertainment, events, geekery, life
Current Mood: excited

Well, it's that time of year again, folks - Defcon looms just around the corner (July 29-31), and I'm putting out a call for fellow travellers.  Currently I am going with Naerbnic, but we would love to have others join us.

We will be leaving the evening of thursday, July 28th, to travel with the Deathrace 2k Caravan.  Please comment or contact me in some way if you are interested - last minute notice may even be fine, but don't make that your plan.  Defcon is a blast every year, and this does not appear to disappoint - Hacker Jeopardy and the TCP/IP Drinking Game are both back, Phil Zimmerman will be speaking again (the Man), along with Fyodor (the Other Man), Bruce Potter, and Paul Vixie...and that's just the first day.

Ah yes.  We shall enjoy it.

Tags: events, geekery
Current Mood: excited