Object Mentor Blog: Why the sea is boiling hot

Why the sea is boiling hot

Uncle Bob — Mon, 11 May 2009 11:09:57 -0500

In my keynote at the Rails Conference last Wednesday, I spoke about What Killed Smalltalk and could it Kill Ruby Too?. In this keynote, as is my wont, I spoke about the need for our industry to define itself as a profession, and for us to define ourselves as professionals. I closed the keynote with this statement: “Professionalism does not mean rigid formalism. Professionalism does not mean adhering to beaurocrasy. Professionalism is honor. Professionalism is being honest with yourself and disciplined in the way you work. Professionalism is not letting fear take over.”

David Heinemeier Hansson, inventor of Rails, and affectionately referred to as @dhh has posted a blog in response in which he asserts that we need artists as well as professionals, and draws a dichotomy between the two. The dichotomy is a false one…

We are a community of artisans. We make things with our hands! We all strive, like @dhh, to make things of great beauty and utility. In no way, and by no means, do I wish to assail that artistry. Indeed, my hope is to free it. I want to convince all programmers that the desire for, and the pursuit of beauty is the way you satisfy your customers. The only way to go fast, is to go well.

I want developers to take pride in their work. I also want them to take pride in the way that they work. I want them to be able to look back on the last few days, weeks, and months, and be able to say to themselves, “I made something beautiful, and I made it well.”

We are a quirky lot. Some of us wear faded jeans with yesterday’s spaghetti on them. Others wear T-shirts that have PI wrapped around them. There are beards, tatoos, tongue-studs and hair in all shapes and colors. There are hawaiian shirts and sandals. There are jackets and ties and sometimes even suits. Some of us speak carefully. Some of us drop F-bombs at a whim. Some of us are liberal, and some are conservative. Some of us relish in being seen, and some of us are glad to be overlooked. In short, we are a group of diverse people who are drawn together by our common passion for code.

There is nothing wrong with this diversity. Indeed it’s healthy. The fact that we all think differently about styles, language, appearance, and values means that there are a zillion different ways that we can learn from each other. And in that learning grows the seed of our profession.

So @dhh is right, at least about the diversity. We should all relish the opportunity to share ideas with people who think differently than we do. But @dhh is wrong when he draws the dichotomy between artists and engineers. Every engineer is an artist, and every artist is an engineer. Every engineer strives for elegance and beauty. Every artist has the need to make their art actually work. The two are inextricably tied. You cannot be one without also being the other.

Now, certainly there are environments where the engineering side of things is emphasized over the artistry side. In extreme cases the artistry is repressed into near non-existence. Such places are soul-searing hell-holes that every programmer should strive to escape (or for the brave: change from within!) Indeed, @dhh implies that he worked in such places and found he was “faking [his] way along in this world.” I completely understand that.

But then @dhh makes his biggest mistake. He equates the professionalism I was talking about in my keynote with those repressive environments. He seems to think that professionalism and artistry are mutually exclusive. That wearing a green band means you give up on beauty. That discipline somehow saps programmer happiness.

But remember what I said when I closed my keynote: “Professionalism does not mean rigid formalism. Professionalism does not mean adhering to beaurocrasy. Professionalism is honor. Professionalism is being honest with yourself and disciplined in the way you work. Professionalism is not letting fear take over.”

This is not a complete definition; but it will serve for my current purposes. Because, you see, I made a big mistake during that keynote. And it is in how we deal with our own errors that the claim of professionalism is most frequently, and most thoroughly tested.

In my keynote I used a metaphor to link hormones and languages. I said that C++ was a testosterone language, but Java was an estrogen language. And then I used the word “insipid” to describe Java.

Now clearly C++ and testosterone have very little in common. My use of this metaphor was an oratory device – a joke. As far as the operation of that device is concerned, it was a success. The vast majority of the audience laughed, demonstrating to me that they were a) listening and b) understanding and c) open.

There is a kind of artistry in making oratory devices like this, and I take a certain amount pride in it. Such devices need to be timed appropriately, delivered skillfully, and used to gauge the audience. They can help to turn virtually any dry topic into a compelling speech.

On the other hand, the construction of this device had a significant flaw. I had equated women with weakness. This was not intentional. I do not think of women as weak. But there it was: Estrogen === Insipid. If you were a woman in that audience, how could you come to any conclusion other than “Uncle Bob thinks women are weak.”

How did I make this error? Lack of discipline. I did not test this keynote adequately. I should at least have run it past my wife! I mis-engineered my art! (Or perhaps my engineering was artless <grin>).

Within minutes of concluding my talk, the complaints appeared on twitter. Women who had been offended and hurt by the remark were tweeting their dissatisfaction. Some men were joining them.

There were two ways I could have responded to this. I could have asserted that these people were just being too sensitive; that they should have realized that this was just an oratory device and that I didn’t mean any harm; that they should just recognize me for who I am and not get so hung up in their own fears and values.

But I think that reaction would have been unprofessional. Why? Because it would have been dishonest. The truth was that this was just a stupid mistake. I built the device badly. I executed the device without testing it properly. I screwed up; and I needed to own up that. So I immediately tweeted apologies to those concerned and ate an appropriate amount of humble pie.

The reason I told you this story (at the risk of sounding somewhat self-aggrandizing) is so that I could use it to help define professionalism. The construction of my oratory device was unprofessional. I should have tested it better. I should have realized the danger of using gender comparisons and taken greater care with their use. I could have done better.

We professionals aren’t prefect. We all make mistakes. We recover from those mistakes by owning up to them as mistakes. We do not cover those mistakes by claiming that everyone else is wrong.

Confronting your mistakes and taking appropriate action is a discipline. It is a discipline of honor and self-honesty. It is a demonstration that we do not let the fear of our own errors take us over.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Divorce Knoxville

Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:26:17 -0600

“Coup de Boule” (French for “headbutt “) is a French song written and performed by … Charts !: Eurochart Hot 100 4 | French Singles Chart 1

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by ???????

Wed, 08 Jul 2009 02:43:55 -0500

? ??? ???

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Madhu

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:02:47 -0500

Hello Uncle Bob,

A well written blog on engineers and artists. Yesterday I started to read your book on ‘Agile Software Development’, and I am a big fan of your style of writing – simple but to the point. You are the best person to talk about artists and engineers.

If it interests you, I have written a blog on similar lines – http://eclipse-info.blogspot.com/2009/02/what-would-we-have-been-if-computers.html

Regards,

Madhu

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Adam Sroka

Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:02:49 -0500

The dictionary defines a profession as “An occupation in which one has a professed expertise in a particular area; a job, especially one requiring a high level of skill or training.” It’s imprecise enough to be exactly useless.

I like the word “Craftsmanship.” We’ve been throwing that one around for a few years now and I like everything about what it implies.

“Professionalism” on the other hand, denotes nothing useful and carries with it some unfortunate connotations. Professionalism could mean simply doing one’s job deliberately and ethically. Professionalism also carries an association with traditional professions like doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. And in that latter context it brings all sorts of baggage – licensing bodies, rites of passage, complex rules of professional liability, long arduous licensing procedures generally requiring years of pre-job training, etc. None of those are things that this community needs.

That is not the context in which you are using “professional,” As is clear from your definition. However, the association is inevitable and the word brings no additional value to the conversation.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Derek Smyth

Wed, 20 May 2009 16:19:57 -0500

Ah yes back again….

“Professionalism does not mean rigid formalism. Professionalism does not mean adhering to beaurocrasy. Professionalism is honor. Professionalism is being honest with yourself and disciplined in the way you work. Professionalism is not letting fear take over.” – Uncle Bob

Thats the key statement.

Professionalism to many is ‘adhering to beaurocrasy’ and ‘rigid formalism’ and thats what I thought (yeah ok I admit hadn’t watched all of the video) professionalism was meant when reading the post.

It’s what immediately jumps to mind.

‘adhering to beaurocrasy’ and ‘rigid formalism’ qualities are what some organisations regard as being professional. The shirt and tie organisations; the in by 8am organisations; the anal retentive organisations.

It’s in organisations like these the ‘traditional’ professional and the artists are easier to seperate.

Mr Uncle Bob it was a pleasure watching you work.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Derek Smyth

Tue, 19 May 2009 07:41:11 -0500

Concepts like artistic and professional are never black and white because they are very subjective.

Being artistic and being professional is not mutally exclusive as uncle bob says; of course you can be both.

However @dhh has a point in that some people are more artistic than professional.

Both blog posts together suggests a balance is needed.

Either the two are balanced in the individual as uncle bob suggests or balanced across a team as @dhh says.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Professional Nimrod

Mon, 18 May 2009 10:12:24 -0500

No, no, no—you are missing the point.

Diversity is important—unless you differ with Giles and DHH and Yehuda. Then your opinions are worthless.

Diversity is only good when we all agree.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Schmoe

Sat, 16 May 2009 00:06:51 -0500

I’m trying to understand the logic here…

Uncle Bob says: “professionalism vs. artistry is a false dichotomy, you can be both professional and artistic at the same time and one does not preclude the other.”

Giles says (eventually): “professionalism is less valuable than diversity, so…” what?

So what? So we shouldn’t want professional people in our supposedly diverse collection of developers? Seems to me that if diversity is such a great thing, then including some professionals in a sea of unethical, untrustworthy bastards would increase the diversity, and thereby be a good thing overall. So I guess that means that Giles is, by his own admission, a fan of professionals?

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Steve Py

Thu, 14 May 2009 16:54:19 -0500

Everyone’s entitled to an opinion. This whole “discussion” proves the point of the value of diversity. The simple message is “use your brain.” Listen, agree, disagree, comment, reflect, and if you choose to follow blindly, or pave the way to the brave new world, don’t feel bad, but don’t let it go to your head either.

Giles hits the nail on the head about what “professionalism” means. It’s not about engineering vs. artistry, science vs. religion. Professionalism is about diong what you do, and doing it well. Software developers will ALWAYS be polarized between artistry and engineering, fact and faith. The concept of “professionalism” should not be leaning to either camp over the other.

The ultimate goal of any professional software developer should simply be “how can I do this better?” It’s not about what tools you use, or what techniques you use, it’s how you expand, combine, and re-combine the sum of your knowledge to deliver better, faster, or whatever characteristics you feel are important to your project/team/client.

And if you can do that without flinging insults and F-Bombs around at anyone that chooses differently, all the better IMO.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Jon

Thu, 14 May 2009 13:15:50 -0500

It’s hilarious that Giles is going to take a break from the Ruby community flamewars, when most of them are waging in his own head. And Bob’s keynote style lacks substance?

Where’s the substance in your “presenter of the year” Ruby Fringe talk, Giles? Give me a break.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Jason Gorman

Thu, 14 May 2009 05:48:14 -0500

Crikey. Is everyone in the Rails community this highly-strung? ‘Cause that’d kill it for sure.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Rob Bowley

Thu, 14 May 2009 04:50:56 -0500

Somewhere in his childish ravings Giles may have a point but unfortunately it’s lost on me and anyone else who prefers civilised debate.

Thankfully I’ll never have to work with him so I can find it all mildly amusing.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Giles Bowkett

Wed, 13 May 2009 19:14:40 -0500

By the way, if you want to know how to misappropriate the gratitude and goodwill that apologies automatically engender so that you too can pass off self-aggrandization as logic, you should check out Robert Cialdini’s book Influence. It’s an eye-opening book, and one of the things it’ll open your eyes to is the staggering amount of misdirection and manipulation in Uncle Bob’s presentation style.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Giles Bowkett

Wed, 13 May 2009 19:08:40 -0500

You’re all wrong (except Gaboto).

Who hits the apex of professionalism in music? The Pussycat Dolls. There’s nothing there but professionalism. Someone else writes the songs, choreographs the dance moves, and buys the clothes. All they do is show up on time, dance the moves, and sing the songs. They’re very professional, and I’m sure some of the people they work with respect them for that, but who respects them as artists?

The counter-argument goes, yeah, but that’s not what Uncle Bob is saying. Uncle Bob is saying we should all combine artistry with professionalism. But again he’s completely wrong. Read “The Wisdom Of Crowds.” The groups that act most intelligently on aggregate are the ones that incorporate the widest range of intelligence. In other words the best way to heighten the intelligence of a group is to add stupid people (assuming that group already demonstrates collective intelligence effects, which all open source projects do; there’s a chapter of detail in the book). Obviously adding intelligent people also helps – but the point is simply that diversity is more valuable than professionalism, and a community which includes nimrods who never test will do better than a community made up only of the TDD elite.

There are reams of academic research backing this up. I didn’t bother going into that in my outburst because I really don’t feel this discussion merits that much consideration or courtesy. It’s a load of horseshit and the honest thing is to call it a load of horseshit. But if you insist, yes, I can point to substantial research that demonstrates why it’s a load of horseshit – or at least, one of the very many reasons.

Also, I’m sorry, but with Aimonetti we got, “I apologize that you’re too sensitive to be cool about something that doesn’t matter.” With Uncle Bob we get, “I apologize, and look! That makes me awesome, and that awesomeness proves my point about discipline!” When are we going to get an apology with no strings attached? When is somebody going to fuck up and just be like, “whoops, sorry”?

I could offer up my own apology to Uncle Bob over swearing at him, but the minute I do we get to the wonderful land of “I’m sorry, and that validates my blog comment.” Enough of this faux civility. If you’re going to apologize so you can claim you’re right, or you’re couching condescension in your apologies, it is better to just swear at the other person, because at least it’s honest.

So, I’m sorry, but fuck you all, and you can eat my balls (except Gaboto).

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Gaboto

Wed, 13 May 2009 14:40:20 -0500

SMALLTALK IS NOT DEAD!!!!!!

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Adam M

Wed, 13 May 2009 14:11:24 -0500

While they both require imagination, art and engineering are not the same.

Art is about beauty and expression. Engineering is applying knowledge to solve problems.

I find it frustrating when people label a visually appealing work of engineering as art, like a bridge, elegant code, or an iPhone. Doing so is insulting the work instead of praising it, as if art is a higher form of labor. Art is folly, while engineering is survival.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Thomas

Tue, 12 May 2009 09:59:32 -0500

Anyway, going back to the main topic, I’m sorry, but anybody who disagrees with me AND DHH AND Yehuda all at the same time is probably just an idiot.

I am sure uncle Bob won’t dare to disagree with all THREE of you in the future.

That’s just how it works.

Nothing works that way.

If you don’t know that, all the professionalism in the world will not be able to help you.

Are you trying to say the world works by agreeing with you?

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by occassional reader

Tue, 12 May 2009 09:55:57 -0500

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone

“As testosterone affects the entire body (often by enlarging; men have bigger hearts, lungs, liver, etc.), the brain is also affected by this “sexual” advancement; the enzyme aromatase converts testosterone into estradiol that is responsible for masculinization of the brain in a male fetus.”

Looking forward to seeing you play with this in your next speech.

- G.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by fsilber

Tue, 12 May 2009 08:57:06 -0500

Saying C++ is the language of testosterone and Java is the language of estrogen is a good analogy. C++ is daring and dangerous; Java is cautious and responsible. I think the error was in calling Java insipid. It’s just not quite as good as Scala - or even C# - which were built on Java’s lessons learned.

That’s not to say that women aren’t insipid. Some women do lean that way (e.g. those women behind the movement to reject Switzerland’s ideology of the citizen-soldier), to the same extent that some men lean towards criminality.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Jason

Tue, 12 May 2009 08:09:34 -0500

Giles, you would seem to have a toxic attitude. Based upon your blog posts you have some kernel’s of good ideas but if this is how you handle yourself when someone disagrees with you, you need some real coaching.

I didn’t particularly like Bob’s presentation, but I didn’t like DHH’s either. The Tim Ferriss interview was awful. Big Deal, move one, get a life, solve a problem.

I’ve said this a number of times over the past two years, but this is a great example of why I left rails professionally. Best decision ever. The community itself was the reason. Thanks for reinforcing the decision as the right one.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Joseph Beckenbach

Tue, 12 May 2009 07:23:45 -0500

Hmm. I’ve met many who believe in a dichotomy between artists and engineers/professionals, on both sides of this distinction. Some revel in it. And in doing so, all have, in my experience, let slip away much of their effectiveness and impact.

It’s not just because artists need to make things that work, or professionals things that fit well into the world. It’s because beauty and function are two intertwined aspects of the same world. Not so much two sides of the same coin, as two halves of the same whole. Christopher Alexander’s work “On the Nature of Order” delves into this in great detail. It articulates much of what I learned while training to be a research scientist, and why the great researchers were so great. And why we researchers (great and not, experienced and not) liked so much to sing, draw, craft doodads, and play with our math, our equations, our lab gear, and our world.

Sometimes the beauty+function shows up as art, sometimes as efficient programs, sometimes as a few words which pivot perceptions onto a wholly new and exciting track. Sometimes it’s just an excuse for a smirk, or a bathroom break, or a war-story told over a beer at the pub. Sometimes it’s a mix of several, like many pictures of galaxies, or of polarized light coming through thin-sliced rock samples. But it’s always about beauty+function.

And, often, about the wonder and awe of experiencing it. Touching that mystery of life keeps me going.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Giles Bowkett

Mon, 11 May 2009 21:34:33 -0500

Giles, I don’t mean to sound rude, or insulting here – but are you currently in the middle of a manic episode? I have, quite literally, been around friends in a manic episode and they sound quite a bit like you. Unbelievably egotistical, moderately incoherent, a certain dangerous freneticism. You honestly do not sound sane. What is going on?

Dude, I appreciate your concern, but I’m pretty much like that all the time.

Since so many people objected to my comment, let me rephrase it.

I hated Uncle Bob’s talk, I thought it exhibited a very low standard of logic and insight, although of course, yes, getting people to test if they don’t test is a worthy goal. And I’ve found Uncle Bob to have a very good sense of humor regarding my outbursts, and I have to give him credit for that. I actually apologized a while ago (personal e-mail) for the cursing him out and all that.

And I think the fact that he sees criticism from people like DHH, and yes, in my egotism, me, ought to be a sign. Especially when you factor in the criticisms from James Robertson and the Smalltalkers who comment on James’s blog. People who know Smalltalk and work with Smalltalk were saying things like (and I quote) “Uncle Bob’s got to be too smart to actually believe what he’s saying, doesn’t he?”

I hated the talk. I mean I just absolutely hated it. I just thought it was AWFUL. Those of you who are still mad about that will be pleased to hear I’m taking time off from my blog and time away from Twitter so I can avoid all these Ruby community flame wars for a while. Enjoy the break. I know I will.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Mark Knell

Mon, 11 May 2009 20:02:57 -0500

> We professionals aren’t prefect.

Nice.

It’s remarkable how many people get into definitional tugs-of-war over “professionalism” without citing the original, technical (if you will) meaning of “professional”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profession

Classically, if your vocation doesn’t have an professional organization, government licensing requirements, and a code of professional ethics, among other things, you’re not a professional. Plumbers are; coders aren’t. In my favorite example, consider the deep amont of dry humor in the phrase “oldest profession”. It’s a jab at doctors, lawyers, and clerics as much as at… well, you know.

At least etymologically, an appeal for professionalism is an appeal to become establishment, institutional, blessed by the powers that be. Culturally (though perhaps not politically) it’s conservative. I don’t know that Uncle Bob intends this, but if so, this is not what Agile needs.

Craftsmanship, yes; ethics, of course; Marick’s Artisanal Retro-Futurism x Team-Scale Anarcho-Syndicalism, very possibly. Speechifying and invective… hmm.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Bil Kleb

Mon, 11 May 2009 19:20:19 -0500

My father is an architect (the Christopher Alexander kind). He always describes it as a blend of engineering and art. Unfortunately, he convinced me not to follow in his footsteps as he witnessed our legal system suck the joy from it with odious specifications.

"Why the sea is boiling hot" by Philip Schwarz

Mon, 11 May 2009 18:08:40 -0500

Uncle Bob,

You said:

Every engineer is an artist, and every artist is an engineer. Every engineer strives for elegance and beauty. Every artist has the need to make their art actually work. The two are inextricably tied. You cannot be one without also being the other.

On the one hand, it could be argued that one reason why an engineer is fundamentally different from an artist is that while many artists believe in “Art for art’s sake”, i.e. that the intrinsic value of art (and the only “true” art) is divorced from any didactic, moral or utilitarian function, probably only a few engineers would take their quest for elegance and beauty to such extremes.

But then on the other hand, in recent discussions about software craftmanship (e.g. here, here and here), I have seen expressed the following belief: “We believe the code is also an end, not just a means”