Live data from Hacker News

The future is emotional

aeon.co

11–20 of 61 posts

Re: The future is emotional

#12

I'm a bit annoyed at the constant background snide and subtle implication of these vague literary articles, that programmers are bad empathetically or emotionally. They use facts such as western programming culture being very male-dominated, and then twist this to imply that males are bad at being empathetic. Firstly the gender ratio of engineers in e.g. Russia is more even, so let's just shoot that one down before c…

The problem is that empathy and analytical thinking are to an extent mutually exclusive. See e.g. [1].

[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121030161416.h...

Re: The future is emotional

#13
post #12

I'm a bit annoyed at the constant background snide and subtle implication of these vague literary articles, that programmers are bad empathetically or emotionally. They use facts such as western programming culture being very male-dominated, and then twist this to imply that males are bad at being empathetic. Firstly the gender ratio of engineers in e.g. Russia is more even, so let's just shoot that one down before c…

The problem is that empathy and analytical thinking are to an extent mutually exclusive. See e.g. [1]. [1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121030161416.h...

I can't program and play music at the same time either, doesn't mean I'm bad at music.

Re: The future is emotional

#15

I'm a bit annoyed at the constant background snide and subtle implication of these vague literary articles, that programmers are bad empathetically or emotionally. They use facts such as western programming culture being very male-dominated, and then twist this to imply that males are bad at being empathetic. Firstly the gender ratio of engineers in e.g. Russia is more even, so let's just shoot that one down before c…

Did you read the whole article? I don't think it was implying anything negative about tech workers or making value judgements. I am frustrated by some of the same things you are, but I don't think they were present in the article.

To me it was saying something pragmatic like "Now that advances in technology are taking care of more and more of our material needs while requiring less labor, there is a relative need/opportunity for workers in roles requiring especially-high emotional skills and endurance". Would you disagree with that?

Re: The future is emotional

#16

I'm a bit annoyed at the constant background snide and subtle implication of these vague literary articles, that programmers are bad empathetically or emotionally. They use facts such as western programming culture being very male-dominated, and then twist this to imply that males are bad at being empathetic. Firstly the gender ratio of engineers in e.g. Russia is more even, so let's just shoot that one down before c…

There's a difference between empathy as a bonus and empathy as a job requirement. Traditionally, people who didn't fit in (the typical nerd stereotype, or maybe someone on the autistic spectrum) could do well as programmers, even if they lacked the sort of soft skills needed to do well in other positions.

Of course, it always helps. But being able to accommodate people with different levels of social and/or emotional awareness is a good thing.

Re: The future is emotional

#17

Any sociopath/psychopath can game the emotional intelligence system by appearing to be whatever they feel they need to be, to get what they want, and it's not pretty.

There is a show called Psycho Pass that directly addresses what you are talking about. It's definitely worth checking out

Re: The future is emotional

#18
I wonder how this relates to what economists call "cost disease?" As the cost goes down in some industries (through automation or other efficiency improvements), this increases wages in those industries, which spills over into other, traditionally lower-wage industries due to competition for workers, not through efficiency improvements.

But despite calling it a "disease," this doesn't necessarily seem like a bad thing. Often they're difficult jobs (high emotional labor), so they maybe they should pay more?

Re: The future is emotional

#19
post #15

I'm a bit annoyed at the constant background snide and subtle implication of these vague literary articles, that programmers are bad empathetically or emotionally. They use facts such as western programming culture being very male-dominated, and then twist this to imply that males are bad at being empathetic. Firstly the gender ratio of engineers in e.g. Russia is more even, so let's just shoot that one down before c…

Did you read the whole article? I don't think it was implying anything negative about tech workers or making value judgements. I am frustrated by some of the same things you are, but I don't think they were present in the article. To me it was saying something pragmatic like "Now that advances in technology are taking care of more and more of our material needs while requiring less labor, there is a relative need/opp…

The article is certainly more negative than you're giving it credit for. Its title makes a prediction about the future, but it spends about 3/25 paragraphs explaining why it is making that prediction (where it quotes statistics about the changing landscape of jobs).

The rest of it instead talks about the benefits of being more emotional (nobody would disagree) and complaining about why people don't seem to think it's as important as the author thinks, but without balancing it out with everything else happening in the world that people have to also think about.

This is done after framing the first paragraph in terms of Obama supporting computer science education, so it's clear that the author wants to imply a contrast or opposition to this, in the rest of the article.

There's also a fair amount of implicit bias and weasel wording dotted around the place, like:

- "But the truth is, only a tiny percentage of people will ever end up working in software engineering [..]" - "It’s also not hard to see that highly educated, mostly male [..]" - "the information revolution frees us to complement, rather than compete with, the technical competence of computers"

The first and third ones basically "beg the question" of the whole article's thesis - it's stated as an implicit assumption, it's never actually justified.

In fact, technology is also automating away a lot of human service jobs, and there's even ongoing research to replace them with robots that can "act" more emotionally. I think the development of this sort of technology shows that plenty of programmers are emotional and empathetic, and the article makes no mention of these.

So it's not infeasible that we'll see a trend (in the long run) of there being less "care workers" of the sort that the article mentions. I'm not in the business of making predictions though, I don't think I know enough - unlike this article which is too falsely confident of itself.

Nobody disputes that it would be good, if all jobs were done by people that were more emotionally sensitive; however you could say the same thing about technical topics, like knowing how your new laptop or phone actually works.

Finally, my own experience of this topic has been that, without exception, complaints about the supposed lack of emotion in programmers or in industry or whatever, has been from people with personal grudges to hold against particular programmers or particular aspects of more analytical behaviour, and who also implicitly think they are "superior" emotionally.

Re: The future is emotional

#20
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the whole article? I don't think it was implying anything negative about tech workers or making value judgements. I am frustrated by some of the same things you are, but I don't think they were present in the article. To me it was saying something pragmatic like "Now that advances in technology are taking care of more and more of our material needs while requiring less labor, there is a relative need/opp…

The article is certainly more negative than you're giving it credit for. Its title makes a prediction about the future, but it spends about 3/25 paragraphs explaining why it is making that prediction (where it quotes statistics about the changing landscape of jobs). The rest of it instead talks about the benefits of being more emotional (nobody would disagree) and complaining about why people don't seem to think it's…

I think you're being overly reactive here. The article really had nothing to do with what you're talking about (though I understand that sentiment exists). It did make a general class-based argument about "emotional IQ," but none of that was directed specifically at analytic programmer types.

The reason that programming was mentioned was to illustrate how our culture is currently very focused on knowledge work (programming for everyone!), so they could make the counter-point that another type of work is currently undervalued. You may agree or disagree with that, but it is a huge stretch to take the whole thing as a slight against analytic/less emotional types.

Post reply on HN