Isn't this inevitable? Rather like the idea of computable and non-computable numbers [1] being a inevitable consequence of the nature of numbers and computation.
If a thought is a mental state then, at any instant, a brain can only be in one of a large but finite set of states. Unless all brains are identical then there must be mental states that are inaccessible to some brains. Extending the state space of some brains by using new mediums, while useful, won't change the principle.
(The question of whether there are thoughts that cannot be thought by any mentality is kind of hard for me to get my brain around. I suspect that such a thing might not qualify as a thought.)
I've seen this before too but its always good to think about how the medium (written text, radio, video, web, etc) shapes and constrains the message being communicated.
This is not a new field of study* but new platforms like wearables could lead to new interactive mediums capable of helping us think in new ways. I'm sure the web is doing this in society already.
Reminds me - is there any circuit design / electronics tool that would provide even remotely similar user experience to Bret Victor's interactive circuit diagram?
It's about playing to a medium's strengths to better present information. For example, on a computer we can use live data and we can offer interactive ways to explore the data and what happens as it changes. We aren't limited to giving a static view of fixed data as, say, a book would be. Victor's key point is that better tools for exploring data can help us to understand new concepts that maybe we couldn't even conceive without that expanded frame of reference.
This page is itself a subtle demonstration of the underlying themes. Victor gave a talk lasting 40 minutes -- which I encourage you to watch -- but he presents it here using a simple, elegant interaction style that also lets you scan a summary of the key points and get a feel for the key illustrations in far less time. This is more effective than either the full video, the slide show, or a transcript would be alone.
That makes it more than a little ironic that you have chosen to reduce your browser to only showing static content by disabling JS, and then posted here just to complain about how the page is broken. If you had used your medium to its full potential, you would now understand how profoundly you have missed his point. :-)
It's also a guideline with little if any rational justification in 2015.
If you need to support everyone, including someone accessing your site from a 10 year old PC in their local library, you need to worry about this kind of thing. If, for example, you are providing some sort of public service or support for the disadvantaged, there may well be ethical and/or legal justifications for making this effort.
But supporting people who deliberately break their software because of some personal grudge against one of the foundations of the modern Web rarely brings any benefit either commercially or personally. Some people feel that the rest of the world owes them everything they want on their own terms for free, but that's their problem, not yours.
"Degrade gracefully" often equates to "follow Web standards". More generally, it means "seek simplicity". Which reminds me of the old saying, "complexity is the enemy". The full quote ending in "... of reliability".
What does disabling JavaScript have to do with "following Web standards"? Next week: If I go to a theatre and wear a blindfold, I may not get the best experience of the show.
The presentation of that page is actually the epitome of what you're talking about. He took a 40 minute video, and distilled it down to just a few essential points and key illustrations, making it much quicker and simpler for a visitor to get the general idea. He is degrading gracefully, and it's not his fault that a tiny minority of geeks won't enjoy it because they're... I don't even know, trying to make some kind of point about the dangers of JavaScript on the modern Web or something?!
Associated Show HN - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799166.