What I hate about "best practice discourse" is how it's used to shut down rational consideration of alternatives the "best practice promoter" doesn't like.
People at my org are currently attempting to forbid the use of a certain reactive framework because they claim it is incompatible with the "best practice" of MVC. In reality, reactive frameworks have been developed in part to provide a simpler, more predictable, more productive alternative to MVC.
I'll leave you with a long quote from Scott Adams that I'm always reminded of in this context:
> When you are trained in the ways of persuasion, you start seeing three types of people in the world. I’ll call them Rational People, Word-Thinkers, and Persuaders. Their qualities look like this:
> Rational People: Use data and reason to arrive at truth. (This group is mostly imaginary.)
> Word-Thinkers: Use labels, word definitions, and analogies to create the illusion of rational thinking. This group is 99% of the world.
> Persuaders: Use simplicity, repetition, emotion, habit, aspirations, visual communication, and other tools of persuasion to program other people and themselves. This group is about 1% of the population and effectively control the word-thinkers of the world.
I always see these types of quotes brought up on Hackernews; an overly simplistic worldview that normally groups humans in to three sub-categories. In these sub-categories there's always a group that's semi-impossible to be in, a group that you don't want to be in, and a group that you -- of course -- are in because, well, we're on _Hackernews_ and not Facebook.
But, and I know the irony is dripping right now, where is the empirical data to back any of these claims? The numbers and groups seem to be things simply thrown at the wall.
It's just a theory that explains some patterns I see in my life. It's definitely exaggerated and oversimplified (Adams is a humorist).
I try to practice rationality, and I admire people that I think do it relatively well. But I agree with Adams that I probably don't do a great job all the time, and we're all influenced by word-thinking. I don't see myself as a great persuader.
People at my org are currently attempting to forbid the use of a certain reactive framework because they claim it is incompatible with the "best practice" of MVC. In reality, reactive frameworks have been developed in part to provide a simpler, more predictable, more productive alternative to MVC.
I'll leave you with a long quote from Scott Adams that I'm always reminded of in this context:
> When you are trained in the ways of persuasion, you start seeing three types of people in the world. I’ll call them Rational People, Word-Thinkers, and Persuaders. Their qualities look like this:
> Rational People: Use data and reason to arrive at truth. (This group is mostly imaginary.)
> Word-Thinkers: Use labels, word definitions, and analogies to create the illusion of rational thinking. This group is 99% of the world.
> Persuaders: Use simplicity, repetition, emotion, habit, aspirations, visual communication, and other tools of persuasion to program other people and themselves. This group is about 1% of the population and effectively control the word-thinkers of the world.