Comment on Strawberries are nuts š
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone āØ1ā© āØmonthā© agoNeither of the two constructions you listed would result in a periodic table.
I⦠didnāt say that they would? If you change the map, itās obviously a different map. Youād call it āMetallicaās table of metals,ā or something.
So your telling me that I need to be cautious of you derailing the conversation away from itās original premise?
No⦠I just donāt think you realize how anti-intellectual youāre being.
iāll be keeping you to the premise and the periodic table for this discussion. It need not go further.
Okay, dad. But, you were the one who brought up fascists.
Very rude, by the way.
Uh, to anyone reading, I guess: Look up Jordan Petersonās wikipedia. He is not a fan of whatever his meat-addled brain thinks Post Modernism is.
If the ordering of the periodic table were arbitrary, it couldnāt be a periodic table.
It is arbitrarily a periodic table because the periodic table has utility. That utility is why we donāt arrange them a different way. This isnāt complicated.
If you want an example of different motivations: Do these periods tell you how beautiful each element is? Does beauty rise in each column and row? You might need a different map for that.
In fact, the ordering even predicted languages that were not yet known to the person who developed the order.
That would be very insightful. I would say we should arbitrarily prefer that ordering because of how useful it would be to us.
Or we could arbitrarily choose not to because just the one language is good enough, innit?
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world āØ1ā© āØmonthā© ago
Im not being anti intellectual. I simply have no patience for frauds masquerading their metaphysics as philosophy.
In the end you canāt argue the point on its merits and are just engaging in sophistry. So weāll come back to the first: you donāt actually know what the periodic table of the elements is. You should stop pretending you have a point if you canāt make make it.
If you donāt understand the difference between metaphysics and philosophy, its probably best you did neither.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone āØ1ā© āØmonthā© ago
Aw, donāt be a sore loser.
I canāt engage with your point on its merits because itās not relevant to the argument that Iām makingāitās a complete non-sequitur.
You want me to prove that the periodic table doesnāt predict undiscovered elements? What does that have to do with where people direct their effort and attention?
This is why the tomato fruit/vegetable example is so useful: itās about what facts are useful to whom. It actually has nothing to do with the periodic table at all, that just happens to be a particularly prickly thorn for stem majors.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world āØ1ā© āØmonthā© ago
You are delusional if you think you āwonā anything.
The only thing you did was demonstrate that you are a vapid waste of time.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone āØ1ā© āØmonthā© ago
Christ, my man, do you need a time out? Are you late for a nap or something?
I promise you thereās nothing at stake here; Iām not ādismantlingā chemistry. I agree itās useful, itās good stuff. Mendeleev did a good job.