I know what I am meant to think and feel in response to this article, but I don't. Keeping in mind that this was written by the one of the three people in the story, who took it upon themselves to post about the experience online later, I can only assume there is some level of bias and quite possibly exaggeration. Put simply, these are the facts of the interaction: 1. An inexperienced individual enters a highly specialized area. 2. Someone who we can assume is highly experienced takes time out of their day to explain to them their (probably popular) conception of how the specialized area functions. 3. This experienced individual gives them something of value relating to the highly specialized area (I do not know what the cash value of this thing is, but it is nonzero), likely in hopes of future business. 4. The inexperienced individual is upset and posts about the interaction online, tagging it with "jerk".
I understand the point of the article, but the characterization of the shopkeeper seems unfair. If you're unwilling to learn from someone because they don't understand what exactly you're trying to do, or because they speak condescendingly, or because they smell bad, or because you disagree with their opinion on X, Y, or Z, you will not learn very much.
This is something that has been over-hyped for the sake of dramatization. Paul Morphy[1] and Bobby Fischer[2] are great examples of people who most likely were already psychologically 'at risk', and 'went over the edge' because of their obsessive chess playing. Certain potentially self destructive traits, largely obsessiveness and paranoia, can be of great use when playing chess if they are moderated.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Morphy#Abandonment_of_che...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fischer#Speculation_on_p...
One of the fondest memories of my life will be my mother reading me "The Mouse And The Motorcycle" when I was just a chunk of a lad. For my entire life, my answer to "Who is your favorite living female author?" was Beverly Cleary. I feel that I, and the world, have been stripped of a little light today. We'll never recover from this loss, but I hope that we can rebuild in the precocious and excited spirit her books embody. Rest In Peace.
I believed I was responding to a comment by the user "zeruch". I may not be using this comment section correctly.
>His philosophical brilliance has always impressed me, his personal presence is like rotting offal in the sun. He doesn't get the benefit of being remembered for the former when he puts in so much effort to broadcast the latter.
I would recommend looking into the less pleasant facts about others you consider philosophically brilliant, especially those further removed from us in time, before you denounce Richard Stallman as irredeemable to history.
I understand the point of the article, but the characterization of the shopkeeper seems unfair. If you're unwilling to learn from someone because they don't understand what exactly you're trying to do, or because they speak condescendingly, or because they smell bad, or because you disagree with their opinion on X, Y, or Z, you will not learn very much.