Fran: I tried reading this article with a mind towards culture, but then it looks even worse. When the response to a “Here’s what I think, and here’s why” essay is mere name-calling, it’s hard to imagine any light in which that will look good.

(Are we supposed to say “Oh, some experts on the internet think his arguments are childish and annoying. They must be right! Even though they can’t point out any flaws.”?)

If you need to “work” in “culture” for “a few decades” to be able to see why a reasonable-looking argument is bunk, and the best response one can summon is name-calling, that looks symptomatic of a field that *needs* such iconoclastic people.

I’m not saying everything has to be science and logic, and I’m not saying PG’s essays are without flaw. There are good critiques of them; this is not one of them.

“It is all consensus” you say.

What a neat little insight into what is so wrong with your group-think world.

He’s just a guy who thinks a lot about stuff, and sometimes likes to put his thoughts into lengthy discussion pieces and put them out there for other people to think about if they choose to. That’s not patronising, it’s contributing to public discussion and helping himself and others to form more robust opinions.

As it turns out, his writings strongly resonate for a lot of, well, geeks like him.

Whilst evoking entertaining thoughts of how the world would be if everyone were to limit their discussions to some tightly defined “area of expertise”, your piece does nothing to advance any debate.

techiteasy.org sure as hell ain’t the intellectual capital of anything.

Here’s a hint: if you think PG is wrong, SHOW HOW HE’S WRONG. Name calling and whining about being “patronizing” don’t do anything.

If you have arguments, just present them. Name-calling is just wasting our time.

He’s been successful in the IT industry so he tells you how to be. Fair enough. As far as I know he has not been in Art, philosophy or sociology.

So his patronizing tone become quite embarassing when he tries to tackle these areas.

On the Cities topic, it’s quite strange to have this addressed by someone who has patently social difficulties (school, corporate culture, etc …). Eavesdropping to get the vibe of the city is pretty symptomatic.

One can say what s/he wants on the internet, that’s true. But between ranting on something on a post blog and engraving immutable truth into bloating essay, there’s a huge difference.

Lastly I’m 100% behind Idle Words post here : PG agenda with these essays is to pretend he’s a cool, international and arty bloke. If he actually was, he would not try to persuade everyone around (including himself) he is. Think Hugh McLeod.

Cambridge is a small place with a tradition for intellectual excellence. There are few places in this world that qualify as such. And I can only think of the ones that host the best universities (and not much else), Harvard, Oxford, etc., some of which are focussed on a particular kind of smart, while Cambridge, I don’t know, may be focussed on many kinds of smart.

But hey, this is internet and everyone is entitled to express their opinions. I guess you’re right Vincent, that one thing that could explain his message is to see it having differnet agenda than “realism” (or accuracy, I don’t know what people expect from him, in fact).

Be smart (Cambridge)

Be the best (Mona Lisa)

Don’t fear the giants (his “Microsoft is weak” post)

etc.

Just like a father, who tells his children to not touch the hot pan because the devil will bite them, realism is perhaps not on the top of his mind when he tries to educate and motivate people.