Re: A pk is *both* a physical and a logical object.
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:59:05 -0000
Message-ID: <1184270345.412913.188250_at_w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
On 12 jul, 18:21, "Roy Hann" <specia..._at_processed.almost.meat> wrote:
> "Jan Hidders" <hidd..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1184253165.108058.298260_at_n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > That is certainly a fact, but I'm not sure if I'm not more worried by
> > the Dumpty Humpties, i.e., those that will insist that there is only
> > one true meaning of a word and every attempt to redefine it is no less
> > than sacrilege. My guess is that it is the fundamentalists that we
> > need to worry about more.
>
> I guess that depends how they do it. One cannot have a conversation where
> the participants can equivocate (as we see here time and time and time
> again).
That has nothing to do with the lack of proper definitions, but rather with the lack of the will to communicate. If both sides are interested in communicating they will establish a common domain of discourse as soon as they notice that this is lacking. If both sides are not interested in communicating you can define all you like, but deliberate and undeliberate misunderstandings will continue to pop up.
- Jan Hidders