The critical concept explored in the Greek Sublime book is about programming and coding and coding and Chandra’s opinions on coding. He brings the differentiation and understanding of what coding is, the works that it carries out, and situations where it cannot be used. The book review argument leads to the knowledge that coding has effects on humans than they might think. The view on the ability of coding to change us according to Chandra is also considered.
Description of What Chandra Thinks About Coding
Chandra’s view about coding is a complex of clashing cultures than Snow did it. Coding was initially meant for women since a woman invented it. The computers that were developed on the atomic bomb were mainly a coding idea from a woman. Using male-oriented skill tests that provided an arrival of what was referred to as being egocentric, Chandra verifies the masculinization of the company. The situation and description lead him to relate the instance to the politics of the British Raj (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014). He writes about it, stating that intellectuality’s intelligence and capability were inextricably intertwined with masculinity in women. In his view, those that exhibited feminists were illogically and those that were easily overcome by emotion. They were those who were incapable of scientific thinking and lacked advancement, he argues. He thought that in the state of the world where women were without power, bore the fruits of coding.
Chandra also thought that coming up with coding was not a result of an accident, and he says that the grammar used was an algorithm and a machine that consumed phenomenon and morphemes that produces words and sentences. The argument that the situation did not coincide is supported through the American syntactic theory, where Chomsky, in the idea of directing Panini, the land in which the computer languages were created, was raised.
In his argument on what coding begins in what he refers to Sanskrit-speaking and writing acumen, Chandra came out in Afghanistan to Java and afterward through different kingdoms, cultures, and languages. According to him, the origin of coding was in Afghanistan to Java and then to other cultures. Instead, in creativity and roots, Chandra turns to the program as a language that he lovingly defines as a bestiary: from the early crude PL/1 to Microsoft’s dorky Visual Basic, the trendy Closure. In this situation, he thought coding was first started as a language and then was used in other means.
When Chandra writes the first novel ‘Red Earth and Pouring Rain’ he says that coding is not a language, nor is it a grammar that can make a poem beautiful. He considered this and went to cultural device Texts to the Tantric of the first millennium where there was the technique’s application. In the quest, he felt that coding is neither a language nor grammar that can enable an artist to fulfill the desired artwork. In comparison or coding and poetry, he found that poetry and logic are different because poetry has patience while there is power in computer coding (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014). Coding behaves with the universe and communicates with itself. Coding, according to Chandra, has been filtered alongside the way. He argues that there is already filtering experience through software. Through coded sites such as offer, we believe that we manipulate, which we also manipulate in turn. The languages that are in apps, websites, and networks write it in individuals.
According to Chandra & Hel-Guedj (2014), he argues that one should not learn about programming in the computers to qualify as being literate. He also reveals that it is not fundamental that one becomes aware of the codes, but it does not hurt when one is aware of the principles and coding. He thinks that one day the regulations will be mindful of us.
In Chandra’s opinion, he does not explicitly answer whether anyone is supposed to learn to code. Still, anatomies do a parallel stream of modern pro-coding rhetoric-that software is an art and that artists should honor programmers. Chandra maintains that art is art, and coding is also coding on its own. Codes work correctly according to his claim, but when Chandra does his fictional works, he seeks to find perfection and then finds the perfect way to defy the embodiment.
The Description of How Coding Understands us More than We Might Think
In the claim, while there are some codes of action that constitute literature, such as in videogames, poetry is not the millions of lines of symbolic instruction itself. In the current use of programming in science and computers, people think and view coding as poetry. Still, the understanding of coding brings it out that the symbolic instruction themselves are not poetry. Programmers need to recognize and assert the exceptional essence of what they do while understanding the control that coding has over humans. This will make it possible to understand the power that the cases have over us since the programmers are directed to the codes they develop to perform coding (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014). Principles, according to Chandra, are kinetic in a unique way. Coding works with itself and with the word and communicates with it. In coding, one is the mental and the material. Codes can move and have control over humans.
According to Chandra & Hel-Guedj (2014), coding should be treated as science and art as an art as they are two different things that sure to be understood differently. In control that coding has power over us in the works done by artists, the aim is to find how the codes can function correctly. Chandra also supports this as he insists that art and coding are also coding is on its own. Codes work precisely according to his claim, but when Chandra does his fictional works, he seeks to find perfection and then finds the perfect way to defy the embodiment. The attempt to find a coding model shows the understanding that coding has on us more than we think.
The understanding that coding has on us is thought by Chandra to be neutral. This is through the explanation that he gives on the coding language referred to as ‘brainfuck’. From answers that are provided by Chandra concerning the taxonomy of programming styles, the identification that has been made is that many can be considered as a low-level “Mort” (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014). This is due to the teachings that one have on BASIC as a child, and can at the moment write HTML and CSS, and hack around in PHP a little until the websites work the way they are needed, make someone to have a primary job which to fornicated widgets.
As good practice and an ethical act, Chandra promotes coding and notes that coding is a vital skill required not just for those employed as software engineers but also for everyone. We might think that the engineers only utilize coding, but the understanding is that there is more control by coding over us than we understand (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014).
The two cultures, literature and science, are still with us with only a shift in the fault lines. In the changes, one can explain the scientific concepts, but they cannot code. One is comfortable with scientific expression, but there is no ability to explain the codes.
Analysis of the Review of the Book
The book argues that intellectual cultures are considered into two, that of literature and science. In the current situation in which people live, many can explain science as literature but cannot go deep into explaining to prove and give the facts behind the science. The cultures there still exist, but there has been a shift as there are improvements in coding and science. This makes coding understands more than we think and how it changes the lives of people.
In the arguments that are given by Chandra, he offers a far more complex view of coding than it was ever done. Programmers feel a frightening original mastery, and Chandra captures in this in his arguments. The idea that he has and gives proof of the codes and how he uses them can be considered valid. Written coding sets off other subterranean invocations that are unreadable to me but can cause artifacts to shift in the physical world and transmitting contact to the other side of the globe.
How coding was considered not the main field is questionable. The discovery was by a woman and was initially considered a lot for women. The question here is on how the others came interested in the field and decided to develop it. Programming was at first the work of a woman in 1840, and the human computers on the atomic bond projects were women. The investigations that were done by Chandra brought it out that there was more than just women behind the development of programming. He investigates the concept through consideration of masculinization.
The originality is not brought out well, and there is difficulty in the version that should be accurate. The historical concept can be considered valid as it brings out evidence of the beginning of programming. The performance of arguments that are brought out by Chandra also has proof of programming being based on masculinization. He writes about it, stating that intellectuality’s intelligence and capability were inextricably intertwined with masculinity in women. In his view, those that exhibited feminists were illogically and those that we easily overcome by emotion. They were those who were incapable of scientific thinking and lacked advancement, he argues.
Computational reasoning, however, is not modern and is based on more fundamental disciplines such as mathematics, linguistics, and philosophy. This, in truth, is one of the messages of the fascinating and often beautiful new book by Vikram Chandra, a kind of techno-artistic memoir informed by his unique double capacity as both novelist and coder (Chandra & Hel-Guedj, 2014).
Chandra can be considered brilliant in technical exegesis with the roles of explaining logic gates or suggesting the appeal of object-oriented programming. Still, he is also skeptical of modern coding theory, especially its pervasive misogyny, through his arguments. This is in the points he provides to the world’s first computer programmers, all women serving in the Second World War US army’s ENIAC machine. The issue of whether anyone should learn to code is not explicitly answered. Still, anatomies are a parallel stream of current pro-coding rhetoric-that software is the art and that programmers should be valued as artists.
The arguments that are brought out by Chandra that programming was an accident can be considered a theory. He thought that coming up with coding was not a result of an accident, and he says that the grammar used was an algorithm and a machine that consumed phenomenon and morphemes that produces words and sentences. The claim is not specific because the history of programming is due to the inclusion of women in bomb technology, which he also compromised. The intention of programming as a result of an accident may be denied.
The coding arguments put forward by Chandra have modified the view on the cording of originality and the descriptions that should be given to cording. In his reasons for women, such as programming, coding is neither a language nor grammar has altered the view that coding is a language that is only intended for computer engineering. In the present situation in the technology field and the applications made with computers, the influence that coding has had over humans without their comprehension can be seen.
Chandra, V., & Hel-Guedj, J. (2014). Geek sublime. Paris: R. Laffont.