Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu
Date: 02/08/05
- Next message: Androcles: "Re: McCullough is caught with his pants down."
- Previous message: cactus: "Re: PROOF OF LIFE AFTER DEATH.!!!!!!!!!"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 23:10:44 GMT
In article <yU7Od.16139$mo2.1277440@news.xtra.co.nz>, "Jason" <jasonstevensNOSPAM@free.net.nz> writes:
>> > I am already familiar with your jargon.
>>
>> Jargon is a pejorative term. Say instead, technical vocabulary. Every
>> art and science has a technical vocabulary proper to its nature and
>> scope. I use simon-pure standard mathematical terminology which can be
>> found in every paper and treatise on the subject.
>>
>> Mathematicians write to be understood by other mathematicians so a
>> standard technical vocubular and lexicon is used. If you do not wish to
>> learn it, that is your choice and problem, not mine.
>
>I think the point is that we're
Who's 'we'? Pretensions of royalty here?
>trying to speak English here, or at least most
>of us. I'm guilty of it sometimes, but I try not to use jargon
Technical vocabulary
> where I don't need to. You don't need to use jargon
Technical vocabulary.
>with the concepts so far. It was clear
>to me that people were asking for definitions, not a new jargon
Technical vocabulary.
>term. People can too easily hide behind jargon.
Technical vocabulary.
The question of what technical vocabulary to use, in any specific
area, is best left to the people actively involved in said area. If
and when you, as a layman, find some of the terminology unclear, feel
free to ask for explanations. That's all.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
- Next message: Androcles: "Re: McCullough is caught with his pants down."
- Previous message: cactus: "Re: PROOF OF LIFE AFTER DEATH.!!!!!!!!!"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
