Re: The word "symbol"
From: x <x_at_not-exists.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:33:38 +0300
Message-ID: <ddvebm$grc$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:33:38 +0300
Message-ID: <ddvebm$grc$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>
"vc" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1124283002.252223.4430_at_f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Since a tuple is just a collection of attributes representing/modelling
> a real thing in some satisfactory (or unsatisafctory) way, it's as
> productive to call it a "symbol" or a "name" as it is to call a
> person's age or weight a symbol.
I said a "relation" not a person or a thing.
> You can of course but what good would
> it serve ? In a narrow formalized world created to capture some
> fragment of reality a tuple modelling a person *is* a person.
Ok as long as one (who isn't a part of that narrow formalized world) does not forget it is not. Received on Wed Aug 17 2005 - 15:33:38 CEST