Asklemmy

43917 readers

1751 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

When, if ever, should one prioritise form over function? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by tomasz@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Peter1986C@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If it is art.

[–] straightpeach@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

But if form and function are the same, there should not be priorization of one in relation to the other.

[–] picoblaanket@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

To be fair, if form and function are the same, then this entire question is tautological. (which is a valid perspective)

For example:

You could make a fork that stabs food perfectly (function).
You could make that fork shiny, with ornate designs (form).

You could say that both are examples of function, because artistic beauty has a functional purpose (to enhance free expression, and emotional impact).

And that is the frivolity of words... They are mostly redundant (and exist for the beauty of form (which is a function)).