Re: Object-oriented thinking in SQL context?

On 13 juin, 13:21, "Walter Mitty" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "Cimode" <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:51fb6b71-d937-4d40-8dc9-410fdf28c464_at_k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>
> >  using a consensually recognized language
>
> This phrase reminds me of the glossary project for this newsgroup.  This was
> spearheaded by Masterdam.  I don't know what has become of the glossary
> lately.
Unfortunately, I have not heard of him lately. Maintaining the glossary was indeed one of the few valuable ideas I found in this board.

> Often, but not always, my failure to express ideas uusing consensually
> recognized language is accompanied by my failure to think my ideas through
> carefully enough before posting.  What's true for me is likely to be true
> for many regulars and nearly all newcomers.  An awareness of the "standard
> glossary" and its appropriate use can improve the quality of discourse in
> the forum.
A glossary of terms indeed helps with communication aspects. However, I stick with the idea that reading books about the subject is a necessary requirement for improving the quality of the input of the ng.

> At the same time, consensus regarding language should not be used as a means
> of stifling unorthodox opinion.  Nearly all good ideas begin as unorthodox
> opinions.  
The use of a specific language only helps with improving communication not the substance.

Unfortunately, most bad (and very bad) ideas may *also* start from unorthodox opinions. Since good new ideas are exceptional and bad ideas are much more numerous, the caution dictates a filtering process that people should do on their own by educating themselves before posting. In other words, learning to use the right terminology is necessary but not sufficient.

> And while most new ideas do not eventually make the grade of
> being accepted as good ideas,  stifling bad ideas is hardly the way to
> promote good discourse.  In the realm of theory, the boundary lines between
> facts, ideas, and opinons are not always clear.
Maybe nowadays the term *theory* is an often overused term. Some people use *theory* as a synonym for *thought*, *impression*, *perception* or *feeling*. Some other use it as a synonym for *idea* as in

"This morning I had a *theory* about..." when all that is meant is "This morning I had an *idea* about..."

As far as database theory is concerned, theory is a mathematical logical fundation called relational model. Ignoring such fundation is openning the door to confusion through subjective *synonymism* (a volontary neologism).

> I think it's possible for each one of us to do better in the area of
> avoiding insults to other participants, even when we find it necessary to
> submit antoher person's posts to very demanding crticism.  I think that's a
> worthwhile endeavor.
When there is a reaction there is a counter reaction. It is equally possible to stop promoting ignorance by simply doing some reading on the subject.

Keep in mind that different people may have different reactions when confronted to ignorance, (that is a thought but does not constitute any theory). IN this NG, I can see 5 different groups :

GROUP 1 --> Some underducated are not able to recognize it due to their own ignorance, whom they are seldomly aware of. One may call MAJORITY
GROUP 2 --> Some partly educated promote ignorance for self serving purposes or interest of some kind. One may call IGNORANCE PROMOTERS. GROUP 3 --> Some educated more altruistic may try to understand the agressors's perspective. These people will be promoting the teaching or will be proselithists. TEACHERS
GROUP 4 --> Some who are educated egocentric, obsessed with truth or simply fed up with hearing nonsense are more likely to have epidermic responses. One may call them GUARDIANS
GROUP 5 --> Some who are educated egocentric, obsessed with truth or simply fed up with hearing nonsense are more likely to seek another places where they stop hearing nonsense. One may call them SEEKERS.

Note that one person may belong in time to ONE or MORE of the above groups.

From what I observed this NG is almost solely a war ground between IGNOPROMOTERS and GUARDIANS which is a shame for all of us. Received on Sat Jun 13 2009 - 15:01:17 CEST