Re: [Paddlewise] Terminology and Communication

From: "Bob Myers" <bob_at_appereto.com>

> On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 00:30:09 -0500
>   "Michael Daly" <michaeldaly_at_rogers.com> wrote:
> >
> >I guess my point was not made clear at all.  My fault. Bob's examples 
> >differ from the specialist's when viewed with the specialist's terminology.
> >That is, while he sees flying as including both flying and gliding, the 
> >specialist differentiates the two.
> 
> Oh come on now.  If we restrict "flying" to what might 
> otherwise be more specifically called "powered flight", 
> then replacing the plummeting person with a 
> high-performance sailplane in John's example destroys it 
> as a reductio ad absurdum argument, which is how John was 
> trying to use it.

Bob, all I can say is that I think you're getting caught up
on the semantics.  The fact is that an aerodynamicist will
differentiate between powered and non-powered flight. I 
know, I used to work with them.  Two of my bosses were 
competitive sailplane designers and builders.  One was
very picky about terminology and would correct me if I 
used a powered aircraft term where a sailplane term was
more appropriate.  The fact that the layman doesn't 
differentiate doesn't negate the value of what the experts
do.

John's points revolve around the _need_ for specialists to 
make the differentiation.  The fact that we can't see the
difference in our day-to-day lives doesn't devalue that.
Please, let him make his point.

Mike
 

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************