Re: General semantics
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 00:22:05 GMT
Message-ID: <Ng%In.4247$Z6.2858_at_edtnps82>
Bob Badour wrote:
> Nilone wrote:
>
>> On May 19, 4:12 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote: >> >>> Have you read William Kent's /Data and Reality/ ? >> >> No, but the excerpts and information provided by Google look >> tantalizing. If you recommend it, I'll place it very high on my list.
>
> I still have not managed to get a copy for myself. However, a lot of
> people, who I respect greatly, recommend it and recommend it in the
> highest terms. It clearly influenced some of the best minds in the
> industry. While I cannot make a direct recommendation at this time, you
> can consider it recommended by better men than me.
>
> Since you express an interest in the link between data and reality, I
> suspect it is prerequisite reading for you. And if you choose not to
> read it, I recommend you make sure it is, at least, in the bibliography
> of whatever you are reading to show the author has some awareness of the
> prior art.
The message I got from the book, at least the practical conclusion, is that we must always think separately about a system and reality, eg., mentally 'switch gears', never let the two get mixed up. This because I remember him saying (which I agree with) that natural language isn't sufficient to capture human experience. I suspect that no anthropologist would disagree with this, ie., language we use can't fully describe our reality. If it could, why would we need any ability to abstract? After forty or so years of public exposure to computer systems there seems to be some evidence of this, eg., in the way that systems 'become' or replace the commonly perceived reality. (Personally I despair about this but it does seem fact to me.) Received on Thu May 20 2010 - 02:22:05 CEST