[HN Gopher] Apprentice, Journeyman, and Master: The Medieval Gui...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Apprentice, Journeyman, and Master: The Medieval Guild (2018)
        
       Author : squircle
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2024-08-04 15:11 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.philosophicalsociety.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.philosophicalsociety.org)
        
       | 082349872349872 wrote:
       | Journeyman sounds very much like a postdoc. (the traditional
       | costumes are rare, but I've seen a few journeymen all togged out*
       | for going "auf der Walz" over the last couple of decades)
       | 
       | * eg https://www.wirholzbauer.ch/de/magazine-
       | online/detail/?tx_hb...
       | 
       | more on the topic:
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
        
       | geertj wrote:
       | These levels are are still used in the US today for eg
       | electricians and other licensed trades. Interesting that they
       | survived for so long.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | (2018)
       | 
       | Some previous discussion:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24473869
        
       | repelsteeltje wrote:
       | Of course, the tag line for the classic Pragmatic Programmer book
       | originally was not _your journey to mastery_ , but _from
       | journeyman to master_.
       | 
       | So much more apt.
       | 
       | https://pragprog.com/titles/tpp20/the-pragmatic-programmer-2...
        
       | Simon_ORourke wrote:
       | These are still very much in use in Germany today. I met a few of
       | these guys in Berlin looking for a couch to crash on for a few
       | days, all carpenters and very funny guys.
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journeyman_years
        
       | zoogeny wrote:
       | It is important to note, especially given the positive view given
       | to the guild system in this article, that it is written on a
       | masonic philosophy page. The freemasons have a long and esoteric
       | history that should be viewed with some skepticism. Secret
       | fraternal orders have a sketchy history.
       | 
       | George Carlin has a famous comedy bit where he states "It's a big
       | club and you ain't in it" [1]. My own feeling is that guilds of
       | all sorts prioritize exclusivity for the purposes of bestowing
       | power on some select few. As the article states "Master's were
       | few and far between". This is similar to how luxury brands
       | maintain their high value: exclusivity. The standardization and
       | guarantees of quality seem to be secondary to the pyramid scheme
       | nature of ascension within these organizations (in the same way
       | that the quality of luxury goods is often secondary to their
       | exclusivity). It reminds me in some ways of the concept of
       | "familiars" in vampire lore, humans who willingly toil away for
       | their masters hoping one day to be elevated to the same level.
       | 
       | It is a complex topic because of the positives and negatives of
       | these systems being highly intertwined. To this day in Canada
       | there is an apprenticeship system for trades. However, it is no
       | longer an inner circle of masters deciding who gets the special
       | status, it is a regional qualification body with clear
       | guidelines, training, testing and certification.
       | 
       | As a society we haven't at all gotten away from the degenerate
       | aspects of guilds. Think of the association with the
       | "golf/country club" crowd. Or things like the Skull and Bones [2]
       | type organizations at elite universities. Or when people joke
       | about the Illuminati. This article is arguing _for_ that by
       | presenting a rose-tinted-glasses view of the past.
       | 
       | 1.
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyvxt1svxso&ab_channel=SkyEc...
       | 
       | 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones
        
         | waveBidder wrote:
         | Historically, guilds were first and foremost a tool to enforce
         | monopoly power on the part of masters against anyone else
         | trying to enter the market (and against eachother to maintain
         | monopoly pricing and supply). Luddites were actually just doing
         | what guilds normally did.
        
           | robwwilliams wrote:
           | Agreed, but parent article makes the good point that the
           | Hansa League and guilds also pushed back very effectively on
           | the nobility in Germany snd Northern Europe (Bergen Norway
           | was in the Hansa League).
           | 
           | And if you are willing to be more generous (as the author and
           | I are) these protective societies of workers and merchants
           | were an early step toward free market economies unencumbered
           | by lazy landed gentry. Compare the history of Spain and
           | France during this era to that of Germany and Holland.
        
             | zoogeny wrote:
             | > guilds also pushed back very effectively on the nobility
             | in Germany snd Northern Europe
             | 
             | If your argument is that exclusive initiatory societies
             | were an improvement on hereditary nobility rule then you
             | won't get much of a push back from me. However, are they
             | better than constitutional democratic republics?
             | 
             | I don't actually have a clear answer to that question. I
             | mean, I have a feeling that I have more chance of being
             | initiated into a guild than I do being promoted to
             | nobility. That _potential_ for inclusion goes a long way,
             | much like the oft-cited American dream where even the poor
             | think they have a chance at being a millionaire. And our
             | current democratic system doesn 't seem to be adequately
             | controlling the quality of our society.
             | 
             | As I mentioned, it is actually a very complex question. I
             | just recommend people to be skeptical. Societies that form
             | around keeping some thing secret except for initiated
             | members for the purposes of exclusivity should be treated
             | with a large dose of skepticism.
        
           | o11c wrote:
           | According to people who complained about guilds, sure.
           | 
           | But let's not forget that fraud and incompetence are
           | _extremely_ common across history. And also that the very
           | concept of _universities_ derived from guilds.
           | 
           | So in a sense we _do_ still have, and rely on, a guild system
           | today.
        
         | motohagiography wrote:
         | not sure what the issue is unless someone had fallen down the
         | rabbit hole of anti-masonry. FOSS projects could learn a great
         | deal about how to run sustainable organizations from
         | fraternities, and their hierarchies and lodge structure is
         | likely a more stable and sustainable form than 501c non-
         | profits.
         | 
         | if you want to know about freemasonry, consider the quality of
         | their enemies.
        
           | zoogeny wrote:
           | I think there is "anti-masonry" and what I suggested as
           | skepticism. For example, nepotism and cronyism aren't de-
           | facto bad (e.g. a father handing the family business to his
           | son or a person hiring a trusted and loyal friend). But if
           | someone is a member of the "cronyism promotion society" and
           | they write an article extolling the benefits of cronyism then
           | that opinion ought to be digested with a large grain of salt.
           | It is worth pointing out that there are some negative aspects
           | to cronyism, just as there are negative aspects to secretive
           | initiative societies.
           | 
           | At it's core, this article is a stealth motte and bailey
           | argument. It points out the benefits of guilds (where there
           | is a legitimate argument to be made about skill transfer and
           | quality of work) to support a deeper ideology about
           | hierarchical structures of society. If one wants to make the
           | argument that the ritualization present in free masonry is a
           | net benefit to X, then present that argument directly.
        
         | diffxx wrote:
         | Late Carlin got far too misanthropic for my taste.
         | 
         | Like all things, we need balance. This is a good argument
         | against guilds, but there are positive aspects of the system
         | too. Imagine a world that was truly a free for all -- one in
         | which there were no trusted authorities in any field. I believe
         | such a society would quickly devolve into a dystopia and
         | collapse.
         | 
         | From my perspective, the big problem is when there is no
         | competition among guilds and the guild leaders wield
         | disproportionate societal power. That is how you end up with
         | oppressive oligarchy, which honestly is a reasonable
         | description of the global order right now. My hope though is
         | that we are better able to organize and compete against the
         | current oligarchic order.
        
           | zoogeny wrote:
           | > I believe such a society would quickly devolve into a
           | dystopia and collapse.
           | 
           | The main argument in favor of
           | totalitarianism/authoritarianism is pretty much always law &
           | order. And the main argument against the prevailing power
           | structure is pretty much always freedom (e.g. from oppression
           | and/or protection of fairness in competition). So the
           | question is often, what is more important to you, order or
           | freedom? How much freedom would you give up for order, and
           | how much order would you give up for freedom?
           | 
           | However, guilds aren't the only way to promote
           | structure/order. As I said, the system in Canada is
           | regionalized through state run organizations which are
           | answerable to a democratic process. It is not through some
           | secret cabal of "Masters" who make arbitrary decisions. We
           | can achieve order without requiring esoteric fraternal
           | societies. For all of their flaws, constitutional democratic
           | republics offer a much better system of accountability.
        
         | q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote:
         | > My own feeling is that guilds of all sorts prioritize
         | exclusivity for the purposes of bestowing power on some select
         | few. As the article states "Master's were few and far between".
         | 
         | One possible reason could simply be there's a lot more _future_
         | impact to granting someone the final title. If you proclaim
         | someone a  "Maestro of C++," then suddenly all the other C++
         | laborers will get a clear signal that whatever that person is
         | doing is implicitly _also_ what they should do, if they want to
         | move up the ladder.
         | 
         | Beyond that, the top jobs usually comes with required work to
         | train the next generation. So this person would heavily
         | contribute, both implicitly and explicitly, to the future of
         | the C++ guild.
         | 
         | Considering that impact in combination with how hard it would
         | be to undo the decision, it's not surprising that many
         | organizations might be cautious about deciding to hand someone
         | that title.
         | 
         | > clear guidelines, training, testing and certification.
         | 
         | This makes sense, too. For any organization that wants to
         | _stay_ in the business of handing out these titles for the
         | long-term, meaningful transparency is a good way to go about
         | it.
        
       | danjl wrote:
       | I have often felt that programming would do well to have a guild-
       | like system. Current job titles and years of experience do not
       | really help to differentiate the quality of individuals. There's
       | also the intangible benefits of trust and quality that come from
       | the system. I'd love to write "craft" code, that is about
       | producing quality code that elegantly solves real problems.
       | Especially in comparison to the current trend of writing code as
       | quickly as possible, with very little regard for quality from
       | folks outside of the dev team.
        
         | eddd-ddde wrote:
         | I love the idea.
         | 
         | I think some people may fear the concept that their years of
         | experience are just not equal to someone else's same years of
         | experience.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-04 23:00 UTC)