You're assuming your conclusion: that the languages are equivalent in power and differ only in syntax. If that were true, then sure, one would simply make an arbitrary choice based on taste. But it isn't true. It's profoundly untrue.
The syntax in that first example you quote isn't arbitrary. It's essentially the only notation that exists for representing the structure of a program explicitly in language. Is that valuable? Uh, yeah. It's incredibly valuable. It's worth a lot more than syntax in many cases.
By contrast, the syntax in the second example is arbitrary: the delimiters and operators could just as easily be organized differently. Perhaps this particular organization makes certain programs clearer, but it loses the ability to represent programs in general.
If that doesn't make sense, think of the fairy tale of the goose that lays golden eggs. Everybody's obsessed with their particular golden egg. Lisp - precisely because of the difference visible in those two examples - is the goose.
There's nothing in this that PG didn't already express in his comment. But what you wrote deserves more than one protest :)
The syntax in that first example you quote isn't arbitrary. It's essentially the only notation that exists for representing the structure of a program explicitly in language. Is that valuable? Uh, yeah. It's incredibly valuable. It's worth a lot more than syntax in many cases.
By contrast, the syntax in the second example is arbitrary: the delimiters and operators could just as easily be organized differently. Perhaps this particular organization makes certain programs clearer, but it loses the ability to represent programs in general.
If that doesn't make sense, think of the fairy tale of the goose that lays golden eggs. Everybody's obsessed with their particular golden egg. Lisp - precisely because of the difference visible in those two examples - is the goose.
There's nothing in this that PG didn't already express in his comment. But what you wrote deserves more than one protest :)