From: Robert Klemme Date: 2008-11-02T21:03:43+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby for Philosophers On 02.11.2008 04:10, Sebastian Torena wrote: > One Philosopher's great ambition may be to create almost one new.concept > during his or her life, almost one concisely written idea, in whatever > language. At certain point, doesn't really matter what language. Anyway > almost everybody knows that Philosophy's History Most-Most Greatest Hits > were written in Greek, Latin or German. I still don't know well why but, > maybe, think, that could be related to some language's kind of > flexibility that favors the creation -to get together in a mind- of > major concepts. I for myself think the reasons for your observation are historic rather than linguistic. The fact that we know these writings has to do with a lot of lucky coincidences and the fact that Greek philosophy became fashionable in different periods of European history. Btw, I believe you forgot to mention a few other languages, namely Hindi, Chinese and probably others which were also used to write important philosophical texts. > So, what all this got to do with Ruby? Well, I've been thinking about to > learn a second language from scratch. It could be Ruby. You should be very clear about the fact that a programming language is very different from a natural language. I am not sure whether programming languages are suited to write philosophical texts although they can help in reasoning about and solving of a certain class of problems (usually in the area of logic). > And I say could > cause I can't find one document that shows me the foundation. The Pickaxe could be a good start, you can find it here http://ruby-doc.org/docs/ProgrammingRuby/ although I'd recommend buying the second edition. There are also numerous tutorials e.g. "Learning to Program" which you can find from http://ruby-doc.org/ . > Is it possible to think about learning Ruby as to learn, for > example, chess? Do you want to think about learning Ruby or do you want to learn Ruby? > If that's true, which are the most basics rules for > playing Ruby? I'd say they are the same for all procedural programming languages (on a certain level at least): you have state and you have instructions that operate on this state transforming it into another state (-> Turing Machine). > I'm a philosopher, I got to think all the stuff by myself, so I'm not > very interested on what programmers are doing with the latest classes or > objects created by them. Just the basic rules; to comprehend and then > start thinking -or playing-. I am not sure whether it is a good idea to ignore the purpose of a tool when trying to understand how to use it. Good luck! Kind regards robert