This made me reflect that I hadn't actually thought critically about the phrase (at least, commensurate to how often it's used). For fun, if you think the purpose of a system is what it does, write what you think that means, before reading Scott's critique, then write if you've updated your opinion. For example:
(Spoilers go between two sets of "||")
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
“The purposes of some systems is what they do” there I fixed it. The slogan is usually used to imply that the nominal purpose of a given system differs from the true intentions of those who design or perpetuate the system. This obviously happens sometimes.
To his point, while it is often a worthwhile hypothesis or heuristic, it is not a self-proving statement. You can’t prove a system is corrupt by design just by observing that it is corrupt.
More options
Context Copy link