Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 39, No. 194.
        Department of Digital Humanities, University of Cologne
                      Hosted by DH-Cologne
                       www.dhhumanist.org
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org




        Date: 2025-10-30 17:46:50+00:00
        From: James Rovira <jamesrovira@gmail.com>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 39.192: theory and fashionable dogma

Thank you for your long response, Tim. Just to narrow and specify the scope
of my intent:

First, yes, my syntax wasn't great in my definition of the word "theory."

I was only talking about the experience of the individual having the
experience, never about the experience of observing someone else.

I was also only talking about the initial precondition for the development
of a theory, not all that is necessary for the development of the theory.
Experience is the initial precondition of theory in that sense. We can't
begin to theorized unless it is about something.

I then specifically mentioned multiple "data points," which would imply
quite a bit of experience over time, preferably by multiple people. I
completely agree that the person doing and experiencing doesn't fully
understand his or her experience at the time. I would add here that theory
is an attempt to develop that understanding.

And finally, I wasn't thinking specifically about tool use: I mentioned
Freud's theory of the mind, the Big Bang Theory, and the Theory of
Evolution.

Thinking specifically about tool use, I would have to ask -- what kind of
tool? I don't think we need a theory of hammer use, or if we do need
something like that, I don't think theory is the best word for it, and
certainly not as I have defined it. A "theory" of hammer use would I think
be a series of generalizations about what is happening when someone hits
something with a hammer (which would vary with the kind of material being
struck and the kind of hammer), the best way to hold and swing the hammer,
etc., taking into account different kinds and weights of hammers. Are
mallets hammers? Slegehammers are already called hammers, but swinging one
isn't quite the same as swinging a nicely balanced 27 oz. Estwing.

Obviously, here in our context, the tool is a computer. People familiar
with programming theory are welcome to chime in. I won't. It's more complex
than a hammer, so use knowledge, programming knowledge, and theoretical
knowledge are three completely different things in this case, all of which
could lead to the development of their own theories from different points
of view. Ergonomics certainly impacts use knowledge, but programming
knowledge? Possibly. I can't even begin to work it out.

Jim R


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php