Needless to say i’m talking about the oversimplified and misleading version of the Schrödinger’s cat paradigm, where he is both dead and alive until you watch it.

I don’t have a job but i follow theater courses at an academy. And my improvisation is both funny and awful until i show it to others.

  • fool@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’m not sure I understand the question

    If you’re looking for a “something is two opposites at once until met” then that’s anywhere any unsureness exists. Lesson plans are decent and lacking until taught to students. Visual art is pretty and dismal until witnessed by another beholder. Speeches are rousing and dogshit til spoken at the mic.

    If you’re looking for a “something that’s explained oversimplifiedly then a lot of people say they get it (and are wrong)” then that’s like a subset of all misconceptions.

    • Monads in programming. Lots of people say they “get it” after a simplified explanation, but actually don’t get it (judging by blog posts that recite a simplified explanation, but actually don’t get it).
    • Tariffs. Lots of people learn middle school mercantilism (zero sum wealth) then guess that the economy is still import export balance, and that if we make people exporting to us more expensive then we get more of the zero sum pie. (Obviously wrong, and a basic macroeconomic lesson on consumer welfare in a system with a world price is useful)
    • A lot of physics terms tbh. “I get momentum, that’s when it’s hard to stop when you’re fast.” Often they mean something closer to inertia. “I get the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It’s when seeing something changes it!” It’s closer to uncertainty in the measurement of tiny things because of the physical implication of what we measure it using. (e.g. by reading a photon off of something, we know we’re kinda inaccurate cuz the photon was discharged)