Re: General semantics

On 5/18/2010 10:59 AM, paul c wrote:
> Nilone wrote:
>> On May 11, 2:20 pm, Cimode <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11 mai, 07:50, Nilone <rea..._at_gmail.com> wrote:> I just started
>>> reading Science and Sanity, by Alfred Korzybski, first
>>>> edition published 1933. I was quite impressed by the following line,
>>>> derivatives of which I've seen in this group numerous times.
>>>> "Because relations can be defined as multi-dimensional order, ...
>>>> after naming the un-speakable entities, all experience can be
>>>> described in terms of relations of multi-dimensional order."
>>>> Anyone else interested in general semantics and it's correspondences
>>>> to the relational model?
>>> Judging from these few sentences, none.
>>> Defining relations as *Multidimensional order* sounds more like an
>>> obscure buzz word than a serious definition.
>>
>> I was thinking about Date's admonition against "flat relations".
>> Perhaps I'm stretching it too far.
>
> From years ago, I remember marketing people talking about 'flat files'.
> They seemed to attach great importance to the term, as if it meant a way
> to organize thoughts with absolute certainty. At the time I guessed they
> meant eliminating repeating groups, which were common in file-based
> systems, it seemed reminiscent of one or two of Codd's early examples.
> Don't know, maybe some commercialist bastardized that to 'flat
> relations', without explaining just how one could flatten a relation,
> nor just what a non-flat relation is.
Whenever I hear the term "flat file", it usually is in regards to "a static resource on our web document root. " Much of our content is images/js/css, which are all "flat files".

-- 
Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>