Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Natural born programmers

programmingisterrible.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 113 posts

Re: Natural born programmers

#21

Post by chrisreichel »

Is not just a matter of having maths skills. There's some other traits involved. These traits sometimes are developed and sometimes are born with you.

You born being introspective or not. This will have a great influence in what kind of professional you will be.

I'm not saying that you can't change yourself, but in my opinion a big part of you is defined by your natural talents.

I consider myself as an introspective guy. This is something that I'm not able to change, and surely it has a great importance in what kind of work I'm able to be useful.

Re: Natural born programmers

#22

Post by davedx »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #11

This article is nothing but a blatant argumentum ad consequentiam, which is a logical fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences The argument given here is basically "mathematical ability is not innate, because if it were, women would react badly to this fact." The article provides lots of evidence that women react badly to this belief, but no evidence whatsoever that the belief is wrong.

Isn't the women's performance being the same as men's in the math tests when they weren't told math skills are innate evidence that women are just as good at math as men?

Re: Natural born programmers

#23

Post by theorique »

hugh4life wrote: post #8

"Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance" The childish belief in stereotype threat is killing our culture. http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/are-girls-too-... http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.com/2013/09/maths-is-man-thi...

Does stereotype threat only work if you believe in it? What if you have issues with the methodology?

Re: Natural born programmers

#24

Post by pradocchia »

ctdonath wrote: post #9

While certainly a combination of nature and nurture, there's little question natural born programmers exist. I am one. At 4th grade Dad brought home a terminal and had me type in a 3 line BASIC program (printed a sine wave). I was instantly hooked, programmed daily, and some 35 years later I'm still lovin' it. That nature had to be nurtured lest it be starved or destroyed, and given room and care to flourish it did.

I was instantly hooked, programmed daily, and some 35 years later I'm still lovin' it.

This doesn't demonstrate innate ability. It demonstrates your interest in programming. Do we have natural born interests?

Re: Natural born programmers

#25

Post by tokenadult »

His first link is to a research article in a collection of research articles, and I'm glad I followed the link,

https://www.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/cgi-bin/drupalm/sys...

because a publication by Carol Dweck in a collection edited by Stephen J. Ceci and Wendy M. Williams just has to be worth a read. (The various monographs edited by Ceci and Williams are some of the best books available today about psychology research.) We still need to find out more about the issues of "innate" talent distribution and especially about the issues of talent development over the course of growth from infancy to adulthood. It may very well be that there is a lot of latent talent for mathematics, for programming, and for plenty of other challenging domains that stays latent (hidden) because no one lifts a finger to find it and develop it.

Re: Natural born programmers

#26

Post by debacle »

I've never even heard someone be referred to as a "natural born programmer." While something like Mathematics can come to someone in a way that makes that person seem like "a natural," programming has so much culture, history, and happenstance ingrained in its reality that it is impossible to become highly skilled as a programmer without a great deal of passion.

Re: Natural born programmers

#27

Post by steveklabnik »

danso wrote: post #3

Hmmm....I've been a programmer for awhile now and have never really felt the mythos that "you are born a programmer." In fact, I would argue that among professions, programming is probably one of the most merit-based ones around, in which we routinely celebrate those who can hack something clever after a relatively short time of learning programming. What other profession can you think of that would allow (and usuall…

He's talking about two things: 'the 10x programmer,' and 'women are just not into programming because genes.'

Re: Natural born programmers

#28

Post by davedx »

rimantas wrote: post #12

Blog post is terrible. First quote talks about of the stupidity of the idea "hereditary wise man". That idea is indeed stupid, but what it has to do with the idea of "natural born"? And while my ability to play basketball can indeed be developed to some degree, can it be developed to be good enough to play it professionally? I doubt that. Now, some my say that there is difference between physical and mental abilities…

> First quote talks about of the stupidity of the idea "hereditary wise man". That idea is indeed stupid, but what it has to do with the idea of "natural born"?

Because "natural born" means "genetically determined", and your genes are something you get from your parents, right?

Re: Natural born programmers

#29

Post by davedx »

return0 wrote: post #2

It's one thing to show that some ability can be attained in a controlled, toy-model environment, it's another thing to say that excellence in a field can be achieved solely by environmental factors. In the nature vs nurture debate, it's not fruitful to argue for either extreme.

How is arguing that excellence in a field is inborn fruitful in any way? All it does is disempower.
Post reply on HN