Re: The naive test for equality
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:14:27 +0200
Message-ID: <42fb956c$0$11064$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> dawn wrote:
> [snip]
>>>>...two departments use the very >>>>same term and might even both have external reasons to use >>>>the very same term, and they use it with just slightly >>>>different meanings. >>... it also happens frequently where such a term is >>used the same when the analysis is done, but something changes >>(government regulation or something more subtle) that changes the >>meaning slightly for one group and not another, so that these >>differences creep in.> federal use of this meaning), you can be a full-time student by taking
>
> In British Columbia (and presumably Canada since I have seen
> three three-credit courses in a semester. The usual full course load
> is five. This is not the commonsense definition, but it is the
> definition used.
Used by all? Or only by non-commonsensical people?
I'm overstating here surely, but I want to point out
that is definition is for a purpose.
People/business/departments who support this purpose
will tend to use it - and check some register or student card
to verify wether somebody who claims to be a student actually is.
Others will simple ask: are you a student?
(e.g. for downloading some software) and accept the
answer as truth.
>>There are always differences of opinion about what constitutes a >>student on a campus. Finance people often use the term as if the >>student were the same as a corporate customer. Student = Customer. If >>someone has received some approval to audit a course for zero dollars, >>the instructor might consider them a student. That is just an example, >>but the point is that entity names are also just words and are >>interpreted by humans, each of whom brings a different context to the >>meaning of the word.> I think this factor is what causes a lot of the trouble.
>
> Such a student is a student by the normal use of the term.
Could you elaborate some on this factor?
> At my alma mater, there are three major classifications: student,
> faculty, and staff. They are not mutually exclusive. I have known of
> faculty who were students and staff who were faculty. There is
> nothing stopping a staff member from taking a course (making him also
> a student) or for someone to be in all three categories at the same
> time.
Let's not draw subtyping into it at this point. (Other thread welcome :-) Received on Thu Aug 11 2005 - 20:14:27 CEST