Python for philosophers

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Sat, 11 May 2013 22:03:15 +0200, Citizen Kant wrote:

> Hi,
> this could be seen as an extravagant subject but that is not my original
> purpose. I still don't know if I want to become a programmer or not. At
> this moment I'm just inspecting the environment.

Towards what purpose?

Do you want to learn to program? If not, then why do you care about 
Python programming? What do you aim to get out of this exercise?


> I'm making my way to
> Python (and OOP in general) from a philosophical perspective or point of
> view and try to set the more global definition of Python's core as an
> "entity". 

What do you think "Python's core" means? What do you mean by "global 
definition"? What is an "entity"?


> In order to do that, and following Wittgenstein's indication
> about that the true meaning of words doesn't reside on dictionaries but
> in the use that we make of them, the starting question I make to myself
> about Python is: which is the single and most basic use of Python as the
> entity it is? 

Programming.

A programming language is an abstract system for performing computations. 
Or, if you prefer simple English, programming. Programming is what 
programming languages are for. That is *all* they are for.


> I mean, beside programming, 

Your question pre-supposes a counter-factual. Namely that there exists 
something *more fundamental* to programming that Python is for. One might 
as well ask:

"Aside from driving screws, what is the single and most basic use of a 
screwdriver?"

Just because you can pound a small nail into soft wood using the handle 
of a screwdriver, does not mean that pounding nails is more fundamental 
to the screwdriver than driving screws.


> what's the single and most
> basic result one can expect from "interacting" with it directly
> (interactive mode)? 

For your purposes, what is so special about interactive mode that you 
single it out in this way? Interactive mode is just like non-interactive 
mode, only the user interacts directly with the compiler, instead of 
indirectly.


-- 
Steven