Hacker News Reader

Comment by kragen | Hacker News Reader

The professions are traditionally divinity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinity_(academic_discipline)), medicine, and law, so I don't see how you could remove divinity from the list. When you argue for including nursing as a "professional degree", what you're arguing is that it belongs to the category exemplified by those three instances.

Edit: please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profession for the current undestanding of that category.

View on HN

[flagged]

Without the 13th-century POV in question, the distinction becomes meaningless.

Why? Can we not define what a professional degree is without the historical baggage?

You could make up a new category and call it by the same name as the old category, if what you wanted was to confuse people and make clear thinking more difficult. If you want to define a category without historical baggage, I would prefer that you used a different term so that it was clear that you weren't talking about the concept laden with that baggage.

I don't think many associate the term with the historical baggage here, so its you who are confusing others by using it that way rather than the opposite.

They may not be consciously aware of it, but that makes them more likely to be influenced by it, not less. Having unexamined opinions generally means having self-contradictory opinions, which makes you easy to manipulate.

Moreover, the Department of Education is clearly using the term in the sense I am describing, about whose further historical development you can read more in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profession.

> Moreover, the Department of Education is clearly using the term in the sense I am describing

But that change will confuse people since it has been a professional degree for a long time now. Using ancient definitions causes confusion, it doesn't resolve it.

I'm talking about divinity, not nursing.

Words evolve in meaning all the time. What's included in "science" now is very different from what was included 500 years ago. Doesn't mean we should create a new term for it each time a new discipline is added.

maybe we should include alchemy in the list then

Ever heard of Chemistry?

Chemistry is not alchemy and astronomy is not astrology and philosophy is not divinity.

Alchemy and astrology were the precursors to modern chemistry and astronomy.

Alchemy was a subfield of natural philosophy, not a profession. Its European practicioners had typically studied medicine or theology.

Is this sarcasm?

And people say the humanities aren't important....

Absolutely

Adore your handle

The problem is the "traditionally" part. What merit does tradition have? None.

Of course tradition has no real merit on its own, but studying the same linguistic tradition is what enables two people to communicate by using language. Unless you manage to complete John Wilkins's project, perhaps, and eliminate the arbitrariness of Wilkins's decisions.

However, in this conversation, we are speaking English, whose words owe their meaning entirely to tradition.

> However, in this conversation, we are speaking English, whose words owe their meaning entirely to tradition.

The meaning of words change over time, so you are wrong, words meaning are not entirely from tradition or else their meaning would not change.

Or if you agree that traditions can change, then what the word meant year 1300 doesn't matter, things has changed since then.

And the word "word" used to mean "to speak", as in make a sound. The word "merit" likely meant "to assign". Current day meaning matters a lot more than what something used to be.

Yes I profess that these antiquated terms are deeply disturbed

What is divinity?

Edited into parent.

A masters level degree in Christian theology. Traditional Christian denominations require it to be a priest or pastor.

Is the US government preferring one religion over others?

Is nursing not medicine?

It is.

Wtf does tradition have to do with it?

Why the hell does a large portion of this country give a rats ass about tradition, but also larp as caring about progress and effectiveness. These two are logically inconsistent.

If anything we should be removing more traditions than ever.

Word meanings are determined purely by tradition. There isn't an objective reality about what words do or don't mean apart from how people use them. If you make up your own definitions for words instead of using the traditional ones, you sacrifice the possibility of communication with people who don't know your definitions. That's glory for you!

Words change meaning and definitions drift all the time. Language isn't static and adapts to modern times.

Besides, this bizarre tangent about tradition ignores that this has some very practical downsides for nurses, it's not just about preserving tradition or whatnot.

You're equivocating. Rejecting the relevance of a centuries-old traditional definition does not mean that all words have suddenly lost all meaning.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com