In general, things that we are constantly reminding each other of are things that we either do not naturally believe and thus need constant reminding of, or things we do not really believe (which can be determined by looking at our actions). The things we all already know and believe, we never even talk about. We know and agree, what would be the point?
For another example (and my, did I have to search for one that was politically neutral...), consider how often we're telling ourselves here on HN that procrastination is bad. If we want to believe that, we need constant reminding of it, constant reminding to carefully consider our real priorities, or our actions will betray our true priorities, which aren't whatever we want or think them to be.
By contrast, consider how often we debate whether the best way to learn programming is by doing it, (exclusive) or by studying it. We might discuss the best way to learn by doing, but virtually no one really believes programming is best learned by extensive study before one is even permitted a REPL. (And anyone who pops up here and claims they believe that I will assume is being contrarian for contrariness' sake. Do take note of my "exclusive" there; of course there's a place for study, but even in formal studies there's no reason not to have the student in front of a compiler/interpreter on day one, or lab day one anyhow.)
Disclaimer: I am definitely being contrarian here and do not necessarily advocate Dijkstra's position.
In Dijkstra's essay "On the cruelty of really teaching computer science", posted here multiple times, he states:
"Right from the beginning, and all through the course, we stress that the programmer's task is not just to write down a program, but that his main task is to give a formal proof that the program he proposes meets the equally formal functional specification. While designing proofs and programs hand in hand, the student gets ample opportunity to perfect his manipulative agility with the predicate calculus. Finally, in order to drive home the message that this introductory programming course is primarily a course in formal mathematics, we see to it that the programming language in question has not been implemented on campus so that students are protected from the temptation to test their programs. And this concludes the sketch of my proposal for an introductory programming course for freshmen."
(Do read his guesses about how his suggestion would be attacked and ridiculed. Reasons he obviously didn't agree with).
I wish we could consult a Dijkstra of today. He faced radically different costs of sitting a student in front of a computer. His opinions might change if he could do what we do today, both simultaneously, for what might as well be "free".
As I said, study still has its place, do not get me wrong, but I see no reason to hold the student back from a compiler/REPL even as we are formally educating them.
> do not naturally believe and thus need constant reminding of
> consider how often we're telling ourselves here on HN that procrastination is bad. If we want to believe that, we need constant reminding of it
I don't think it's so much that there are people who think procrastination isn't a bad thing, it's just that it can be a really hard problem to overcome; hence, so much discussion about ways to do so.
There's an old saying that actions speak louder than words; I've come to believe it's phrased too weakly. Especially when it comes to determining what a person believes, words verge on useless. It's easy to assert that you believe procrastination is bad, but if your actions don't show any change, I don't consider that as you really believing it.
I do not believe that repeated assertions are a bad thing. A huge amount of self-discipline amounts to just this sort of hack, where your forebrain tries to figure out a way to basically trick the hindbrain into doing what you want. I also think that in order to optimally use these techniques, its important to understand what you're doing, and to clearly see and understand the discrepancy between actions and words. So I do not intend pointing out the mismatch between words an actions as a criticism, but as an observation.
For another example (and my, did I have to search for one that was politically neutral...), consider how often we're telling ourselves here on HN that procrastination is bad. If we want to believe that, we need constant reminding of it, constant reminding to carefully consider our real priorities, or our actions will betray our true priorities, which aren't whatever we want or think them to be.
By contrast, consider how often we debate whether the best way to learn programming is by doing it, (exclusive) or by studying it. We might discuss the best way to learn by doing, but virtually no one really believes programming is best learned by extensive study before one is even permitted a REPL. (And anyone who pops up here and claims they believe that I will assume is being contrarian for contrariness' sake. Do take note of my "exclusive" there; of course there's a place for study, but even in formal studies there's no reason not to have the student in front of a compiler/interpreter on day one, or lab day one anyhow.)