I am not a native English speaker, but I think I'm versed well enough to know that you know what I meant to say. I also do think that it is a little bit unfair for you to mention my grammar and punctuation since you yourself use words like "caps" and "Wellllll". Not only it is hypocritical, but also comes across as a Stickman argument of a sort.
I'm sorry for pointing this out. But, I mean, you are partially right, I do think that sometimes, when working with complex concepts, the language needs to be pretty clear for a common understanding to develop between parties involved.
With that said, I do tend to play with my language to see if I can modify it's impact, while still keeping that which my words represent intact.
While my choices may not seem rational, they are not wrong. I may be trying to present a point that whether we are talking about programming or human languages all of them are exercises in logic and symbolic construction, all you have to do is learn how to make sense of it. Or ask for clarification.
So, I think you just haven't learned to appreciate any sorts of languages yet. But I do applaud your knowledge of grammar.
Now, onto this: "I think the community's objection to your post stems from the now frowned-upon sentiment that there are behaviors that are absolutely required to fit in in this community or, especially, to be a rationalist."
This is the most irrational thing I've heard in a while. The most rational behaviour for a rationalist to have is to be rational, no matter which community it is, or how many karma points someone has, and no matter how many grammatical errors you find.
And, please, never say languages are nothing. It is an insult to the achievement of our species.
"Lisp, Prolog, Haskell any of these". Thanks, I completely forgot about that rule.
Sorry if I wasn't the reply you were were hoping to see.
Knowing you are not a native English speaker makes me even more inclined to forgive your errors (notice that I did not criticize your grammar until you asked), since you are correct in observing that they did not seriously interfere with comprehension. But poorly put-together sentences do detract from a message, irrational as that may be.
"The most rational behaviour a rationalist can have is to be rational." What does this even mean? And how does it relate to my objection that knowing three programming languages is not a requirement of rationali...
Learning to program in a given language requires a non-trivial amount of time. This seems to be agreed upon as a good use of LessWrongers' time.
Each language may be more useful than others for particular purposes. However, like e.g. the choice of donation to a particular charity, we shouldn't expect the trade-offs of focusing on one versus another not to exist.
Suppose I know nothing about programming... And I want to make a choice about what language to pick up beyond merely what sounds cool at the time. In short I would want to spend my five minutes on the problem before jumping to a solution.
As an example of the dilemma, if I spend my time learning Scheme or Lisp, I will gain a particular kind of skill. It won't be a very directly marketable one, but it could (in theory) make me a better programmer. "Code as lists" is a powerful perspective -- and Eric S. Raymond recommends learning Lisp for this reason.
Forth (or any similar concatenative language) presents a different yet similarly powerful perspective, one which encourages extreme factorization and use of small well-considered definitions of words for frequently reused concepts.
Python encourages object oriented thinking and explicit declaration. Ruby is object oriented and complexity-hiding to the point of being almost magical.
C teaches functions and varying abstraction levels. Javascript is more about the high level abstractions.
If a newbie programmer focuses on any of these they will come out of it a different kind of programmer. If a competent programmer avoids one of these things they will avoid different kinds of costs as well as different kinds of benefits.
Is it better to focus on one path, avoiding contamination from others?
Is it better to explore several simultaneously, to make sure you don't miss the best parts?
Which one results in converting time to dollars the most quickly?
Which one most reliably converts you to a higher value programmer over a longer period of time?
What other caveats are there?