Re: The term "theory" as in "database theory"

From: Marshall <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com>
Date: 26 Jan 2007 22:33:36 -0800
Message-ID: <1169879616.314041.298460_at_p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>


On Jan 26, 10:40 am, "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> [...] Below is the dictionary.com list of definitions. Which of the
> following comes closest to the use of the term "theory" in this ng as
> in "database theory", [...]
>
> >From dictionary.com
> "1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of
> explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
> 2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in
> contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as
> reporting matters of actual fact.
> 3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging
> to one subject: number theory.
> 4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or
> methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
> 5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the
> method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
> 6. contemplation or speculation.
> 7. guess or conjecture."

3 and 4 are best. 5 is close.

2, 6, and 7 are the layman's use of the term, which basically means a wild-assed guess.

1 is in the neighborhood, but refers specifically to the natural world rather than the abstract world.

Occam's razor is in the same domain as 1, and doesn't really apply, except perhaps as a design principle. I'm not clear why you're focusing on an offhand comment of FP's in an old dbazine article.

Marshall Received on Sat Jan 27 2007 - 07:33:36 CET

Original text of this message