Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Definitions



I'll back up a bit to offer a couple of situations in which arguing
about definitions is not mere bickering.

1) When someone talks about a "generalized rotation," but does not
define what that term means.

2) When someone talks about "static equilibrium", but cannot
distinguish static equilibrium from non-static (dynamic?) equilibrium.

I'll argue about the use of a term when it is not defined (even by
example), when it's mere surplusage, or when it leads to an incorrect
or inconsistent conclusion. I think one is free to define one's terms
any way one wants as long as a one does not run afoul of these
proscriptions. There may be other situations, which, if not wrong, at
least should be avoided, e.g., leads to unnecessary confusion, an
acceptable term already exists, etc.

Now, back to the bickering.

Glenn A. Carlson, P.E.
gcarlson@mail.win.org

At 8:27 AM -0500 10/27/00, Glenn A. Carlson wrote:

Glenn A. Carlson, P.E.
gcarlson@mail.win.org

Subject: Re: Cause and Effect
From: Jim Green <JMGreen@SISNA.COM>

From my point of view there is absolutely no (zero) benefit from
insisting
on one's own definition of any word.

But for heaven's sake stop bickering about the semantics of the
words.