Mediocre mechanical interpretation can be worse than no interpretation at all

Evidence

2. . A good device is far better than no contact at all. … 3. . A good result by device is better than a poor performance by an individual. … 4. . A poor interpretation by mechanical means is worse than a poor interpretation by personal contact. … 5. . A poor interpretation by mechanical means is not necessarily better than none at all; it may be worse than none at all, for you may add the same insult to injury as when one imposes upon another person a time-wasting telephone call. — Freeman Tilden, Interpreting Our Heritage, 567

Categorization

• SEED: A ranking of delivery modes (direct > good device > good personal > bad device < nothing) is a reusable framework for evaluating any mediation of pedagogy or craft — tech-mediated teaching, AI-generated content, translation.
• APHORISMS: The principle that a poor substitute can actively insult — like a time-wasting telephone call — is genuine advice about knowing when to stay silent rather than deliver badly.
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
• XREF: connects to: Mechanical causality cannot account for qualitative change or historical novelty.; Mastering a theory’s principles alone does not ensure correct application; Effective agency requires no knowledge of underlying mechanical causation (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Mastering a theory’s principles alone does not ensure correct application #expands (0.85)
• Accurate facts without provocation are ineffectual in interpretation #corroborates (0.85) — Freeman Tilden, Interpreting Our Heritage, 281
• Mechanical causality cannot account for qualitative change or historical novelty. #corroborates (0.78)
• Interpretation has two genuine tasks distinct from filling gaps in deficient rules #responds-to (0.75) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 1973
• Effective agency requires no knowledge of underlying mechanical causation #contradicts (0.72)