mortalone said:
Shirotsume said:
mortalone said:
Amberion said:
mortalone said:
That does not mean he would be very book smart. I don't have strong feelings about where he would be in terms of theoretical basis, but if I were to guess his strong point would be practical knowledge. He'd more likely be an engineer than a scientist -- and I don't see him as a philosopher regardless of upbringing.
I don't really agree with you. Both Minato and Kushina I think where good with theory. At least I think it's necessary when you are into seals. And things like that are somewhat genetic. And a Naruto with the right stimuli growing up, would have a vastly superior mind to the one he has in canon.
Disagree. Or perhaps you are missing my point entirely.
You may be able to argue Minato is more of a scientist type based on his development of a technique that is the theoretical limit of spatial manipulation (although even then, we now know that this technique was inspired by the Bijuu bomb), but I disagree entirely about what sealing technique ability proves. If you want to view sealing techniques in terms of real world jobs, my headcanon is that the closest match would be computer programming.
There's a huge difference in abstraction between computer programming and developing scientific theory and another huge difference between developing scientific theory and another huge difference in abstraction in studying a field like mathematics or philosophy. I'm not saying that programmers and engineers are incapable of abstract thought, but there's a fundamental difference in the job. It's much more practical, much more hands on. Of course there is overlap (and a lot of it -- depending on what exactly you study), but what I am driving at is that different people's brains are wired in fundamentally different ways and depending on how you are wired determines which job you are most suited for and how you will approach that job.
Naruto is a very hands on guy. He's not going to be the guy studying fluid-structure interaction models to determine the ideal shape of a wing. He's going to the guy crafting the model that goes in the wind tunnel and physically conducting that experiment. He's not going to be attempting to model the stock market with stochastic differential equations. He's going to be the guy who writes the script that buys and sells stocks based on how the market has fluctuated on a given day.
And that's assuming he takes a white collar job at all. My money is that if he were a real person he'd go into MMA or pro-wrestling.
Please cease trying to draw parallels about programming when you clearly haven't the foggiest clue about what we actually do. :headbanger:
Make a point or go troll elsewhere.
The only person who is trolling here seems to be you.
You do realize that programming is literally layers and layers and layers of mathematical abstraction on top of electrical abstraction on top of...
We can sit here and go down this rabbit hole for as long as you like, good programming involves a fuckload more theory than you would think. Why the fuck do you think that most colleges have their computer science program under mathematics, and nearly all of the courses aren't about programming, but are about mathematical theory?
My degree was maybe 12 actual programming classes, three electrical, a handful of GECs, and around 40ish math theory classes.
Telling a computer what to do isn't hard. it's figuring out what the fuck you want the computer to do. You can't just tell it "Yeah, if you could just have a list of all the stress points on this engine for me by friday, that would be great."
What engine? Where is the engine? What is the engine? How is this engine made? What's a stress point? What quantifies a stress point? How do we search through the engine? What kind of stresses? hell, what are the materials, the outside forces, the composition of the materials, the computer knows none of this.
I mean, fucks sake, it may not even know what a list is. What format, what order, what kind of numbers, what.... you get the idea. I hope.
