Is Python a Zen language?

[Crutcher]

> My point is simply that, for some languages L,
> "Zen and the art of L" or "The Tao of L" are plausible
> titles ("Zen and the Art of Lisp Programming" would be plausible) but
> for some languages they wouldn't ("The Tao of Fortran" ?)
> Do you disagree?

No, I don't disagree that people do this. The history of "Zen and the
Art of X" dates from "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair", which is
actually about Zen and Motorcycles. Really. It is also a cool title,
and people have used it, and used it, and used it. I suspect that the
rash of "The Tao of X" is based upon "The Tao of Pooh" (which is
actually about Tao and Pooh, the bear), but I'm not as comfortable
making the claim that these titles are all descendent.

> I have no doubt that this usage of terms from Eastern Mysticism must be
> annoying to someone such as yourself who has actually studied it, but
> the genie can't be put back into the bottle. It is no longer really
> plausible to be a purist regarding words like "Zen" or "Tao" - it just
> makes you appear pedantic.

First, my exposure to estern mysticism is limited (probably less than
100 hours). I think I made that clear in my post. Second, when you ask
"Is X a Zen Language", you are asking for a pedantic discussion.

If you seek clarity in language classification, you should not start
the discussion by hijacking terms which are not understood. Adding
mystery to a difficult discussion does not answer any questions, it
just makes the discussion seem cooler.

My central thesis: you are using a poor understanding of language to
classify languages into things you understand (tool languages) and
things which _you_ find 'deep' (and difficult to learn), which you call
'Zen languages'. This is ridiculous, e.g. deserving of ridicule. I am
being mean because you are engaging in mental masturbation in public,
and I'm worried that you might convince someone.