From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net)
Date: Fri Jul 16 1999 - 16:35:39 MDT
> BTW, You mention this naming convention inconsistency - I've noticed a lot
> of this in science, it's bloody annoying. Consistency, if nothing else,
> should be provided by the scientific community as a prerequisite, don't you
> think? Makes sound inference possible.
But creating words for things is itself the exercise of reason, and
"consistency" would be stagnant and uncreative. Coining new words is
the very essence of research; but we cannot insist that new concepts
always be clearly marked with wholly new coinages, because recognition
of the association between new ideas and old also helps the process
of understanding. /While/ they are being used, we should insist on
precise definition and demarcation when necessary (for example,
within a single paper, usage should be consistent). But throughout
the field of study as a whole, it's not possible or desirable.
Fields of study evolve in parallel to the language used by them.
I am not a physicist, so I will have to pull examples from my
current field of study, poker. If a student takes the time to
learn and understand what is meant by the terms "pot odds", "outs",
"overcards", "counterfeiting", "scare cards", "semi-bluff", and all
the others, ey would be well on eir way to a solid game. Further,
ey would be able to follow the discussions in the field that build
new concepts with new terms like "ostensible outs" or "counterfeit
protection". That's the very nature of study. But it is inevitable
that some of these terms will collide, change their scope, be reused
in new contexts, merge, split, and do all manner of other confusing
things. This is good; it means the field is alive and growing.
A "live" card has a very specific meaning in 7-stud, and a related
but different meaning in Texas hold'em--but that doesn't mean we
should use a new word for it, because they serve similar functions
and thinking of them as the same aids understanding.
Consistency is great in a single argument or piece of writing.
In a whole field of study, I don't see much use for it; indeed,
I think that curricula that strive for it are doing damage to
the minds of students by making them think that the fields are
settled and that there is general agreement on things.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:30 MST