Re: foundations of relational theory?

From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 05:39:53 GMT
Message-ID: <J0omb.23423$HS4.91063@attbi_s01>

"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message news:K5mdnVW6QOnLJwuiU-KYuA_at_golden.net...

> Paul, there are reasons I observed long ago that Dawn is an idiot. Dawn
> substitutes irrational emotive criteria for rational objective criteria. One
> can measure and quantify simplicity and complexity. Feeling plays no part in
> forming a valid conclusion.

Every human uses a combination of emotion and rational thought all contexts. True, the percentage will be different from person to person, but the mix is there, always.

(I recognize that I have not substantiated this claim in any way.)

For myself, I find it extremely useful and clarifying to debate with people who hold different views than myself. This is the essential reason I'm on Usenet: to learn through exposure to new ideas, and debates thereon.

I happen to believe, with some degree of education, that the relational model is superior to the MV model. Of course, I don't know all that much about the MV model, so my ability to compare the two is limited. By engaging in this debate, one of three things will happen:

I will discover that the MV model is superior to the relational model, for some measure of superiority.
I will discover that they each have areas of strength and weakness.
I will be able to learn exactly and precisely what weaknesses the MV model has relative to the relational model, deepening my understanding and apprecation for relational.

Now, I have a strong guess as to which one it will be, but no matter what, I'm going to learn. In this exchange, I can't lose!

Marshall

PS. Maybe for someone else who's already done this a lot, the benefit will be much less. For instance, I don't hang out much on comp.lang.java.programmer, any more, because I've already done every intra-Java debate to death. Received on Sat Oct 25 2003 - 00:39:53 CDT