SUO: Re: SUOP Topic :> Elucidation Of Definition
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
omegad!!! are you telling me that arnold 'can' be potus!?
jon
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
John F. Sowa wrote:
>
> Jon,
>
> I would like to cite two of the greatest procedures documents
> of all time: the Ten Commandments and the US Constitution.
> Those documents are exceptionally short for the amount of
> influence they have had over the centuries, and both of them
> are singularly lacking in definitions. As evidence, see
>
> http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html
> U.S. CONSTITUTION
>
> The absence of definitions has not diminished their importance,
> but it has led to a voluminous literature consisting of case
> histories and new interpretations of the original texts in terms
> of those cases. If you examine the history of interpretations
> in detail, the wisdom of *not* including definitions becomes
> apparent: it would have been impossible for the original authors
> to invent definitions that could have stood the test of time.
>
> As it turns out, the wording of both documents has been remarkably
> resiliant because the meaning of the texts has evolved along with
> the meaning of the terms in those texts. And the case studies
> in law courts (secular and ecclesiastical) have proved to be a
> very effective way of updating the interpretations of both the
> original texts and the words they contain.
>
> I recommend that we adopt a similar policy: draw up a short
> list of guidelines for SUO procedures and avoid wasting time
> on the definitions of the terms. Inevitable questions will
> arise, many of which we could not have anticipated in advance.
> The proper time to make the interpretations more precise is
> in answer to the actual questions that arise.
>
> John Sowa
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o