Re: By The Dawn's Normal Light
Date: 27 Oct 2004 12:29:44 -0700
Message-ID: <1098905384.457294.267420_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
> But who declares the old definition "useless"? Is there some sort of
peer
> review on this process, like there is in the world of science?
Uh... yeah! This forum! We're it!
> And what
> happens to all the body of theoretical papers that are already out
there
> that make a point that's valid under the old definition, but are
suddenly
> logically wrong under the new definition.
> Do we ask Winston do go back and
> rewrite all those papers so as to be "correct" under the new
definition?
>
> Or do we just throw the old papers in the memory hole?
Depends on the paper in question. Certainly some of its statements might be, at best, meaningless. Completely wrong? Maybe. And that's not dependent on the definition; that's dependent on them never understanding that the definition relied on undefined terms.
- erk