Both statements can be true at the same time, even though they seem to point in different directions. Here's how:
1. *"If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading"* is a normative or idealistic statement — it sets a standard or value judgment about the quality of writing and reading. It suggests that only writing with value, purpose, or quality should be produced or consumed.
2. *"There is a lot of handwritten crap"* is a descriptive statement — it observes the reality that much of what is written (specifically by hand, in this case) is low in quality, poorly thought-out, or not meaningful.
So, putting them together:
* The first expresses *how things ought to be*.
* The second expresses *how things actually are*.
In other words, the existence of a lot of poor-quality handwritten material does not invalidate the ideal that writing should be worth doing if it's to be read. It just highlights a gap between ideal and reality — a common tension in creative or intellectual work.
Would you like to explore how this tension plays out in publishing or education?
Both statements can be true at the same time, even though they seem to point in different directions. Here's how:
1. *"If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading"* is a normative or idealistic statement — it sets a standard or value judgment about the quality of writing and reading. It suggests that only writing with value, purpose, or quality should be produced or consumed.
2. *"There is a lot of handwritten crap"* is a descriptive statement — it observes the reality that much of what is written (specifically by hand, in this case) is low in quality, poorly thought-out, or not meaningful.
So, putting them together:
* The first expresses *how things ought to be*. * The second expresses *how things actually are*.
In other words, the existence of a lot of poor-quality handwritten material does not invalidate the ideal that writing should be worth doing if it's to be read. It just highlights a gap between ideal and reality — a common tension in creative or intellectual work.
Would you like to explore how this tension plays out in publishing or education?
[dead]
That sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent.
> If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading.
It does NOT mean, AT ALL, that if it is worth writing, it is worth reading.
Logic 101?
That rule does not imply the inverse
I mean we have automated systems that 'write' things like tornado warnings. Would you rather we have someone hand write that out?
It seems the initial rule seems rather worthless.
1. I think the warnings are generally "written" by humans. Maybe some variables filled in during the automation.
2. So a rule with occasional exceptions is worthless, ok
>I mean, there is a lot of hand written crap to
You know how I know the difference between something an AI wrote and something a human wrote? The AI knows the difference between "to" and "too".
I guess you proved your point.
It is a necessary but not sufficient condition, perhaps?
Necessary != sufficient.