Lisp

The real problem with Lisp is that it was designed without any consideration of the cognitive load experienced by the programmer.  The syntax may be simple, but the semantics are extremely complex and hard to master.  This is completely at odds with needs of the programmer. 

The main cognitive load is in developing a solution to the real world problem.  The programmer is engaged in reflective cognition.  Basic UI principles dictate that, when designing tools to aid in reflective cognition, they must as intellectually shallow as possible.  The less cognition required to operate them, the more is available for completing the required task.

Lisp was unintentionally designed for experiential cognition.  It contains many artifacts, each with a very deep and rich set of semantics.  All cognition must be devoted to its operation.  It is no surprise that it only attracts programmers who are only interested in using it for its own sake.

>>14
People use swear by Lisp because they'd rather be bound by their environment than have to come to terms with being bound by their imagination.

You are talking about Scheme. The opposite is true of Common Lisp.

the only unpractical thing about Lisp is that it's hard to find people who are willing to help you with it in real life (as opposed to on IRC.)

Using Lisp means you are OK with working alone, basically.

But high level languages let you skip the bullshit. Yes there are lots of times since becoming a high level programmer that I hit an imagination "writers block." But back when I wrote C++, I would have filled this time with reinventing Lisp/Smalltalk, or else by inventing something that solves an incredibly stupid C++-specific problem. (as if there's any other kind.)

Java isn't much better. When I think of intellectual masturbation, i think of this: http://harmful.cat-v.org/Blog/2009/08/05/0-java-factory/

I don't think of Lisp. The features that Lisp provides me prevent me from writing public class StubFactoryFactoryProxyImpl extends StubFactoryFactoryDynamicBase. I get right to fucking work on the real problem, instead of dicking around.

>>26
I don't think of Lisp. The features that Lisp provides me prevent me from writing public class StubFactoryFactoryProxyImpl extends StubFactoryFactoryDynamicBase. I get right to fucking work on the real problem, instead of dicking around.
Sure, get rid of the logical bloat and replace it with a shitload of parentheses instead. Fucking brilliant.