In message <[email protected]>, dated Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Richard Nute <[email protected]> writes:
>Yes, a noun represents a "thing." > >The noun "hazard" supposedly represents a "thing." >Can you identify the "thing" that is a "hazard"? > >Would you say that a safe product is one that has >no "hazards"? Trick question, of course. Some products have to exhibit hazardous features in order to perform their intended service. Examples are an electric drill and a hand saw. > >A long time ago, one of my professors described >some nouns as "thingified abstractions." We tend >to think that "things" have properties that can >be detected by one or more of the five senses. >An abstraction does not have properties that can >be detected by the five senses. I think this is simplistic. It would appear to classify gaseous nitrogen as a 'non-thing' and 'child abuse' (which you can unfortunately see and hear, but is surely an abstraction) as a 'thing'. Or is 'child abuse' a generic term for numerous harms, and generic terms for harms are 'things'? > >The noun "hazard" represents an abstraction, not >a real "thing." Consequently, the word has >different meanings for each of us. For this >reason, it may not be a "perfectly good" noun, >depending on the context. I would respectfully disagree with the good professor. The word 'hazard' is an example of a generic term, and may be defined as 'anything potentially harmful'. Most 'anythings' can be detected by one or more senses, but there are extensive exceptions, see below. > >We can't communicate very well if each of us has >a different meaning for "hazard." Indeed, that is >the case! > >Your definition defines "hazard" as some "thing." > >If you think about the "thing" that "can hurt you >or do property damage," I think you will find that >the "thing" is energy (joules) that is transferred >from an energy source to a body part or to property. I think that is in one sense overly analytical and in another is incomplete. If the 'thing' is energy, are the sources themselves 'non-things'? I would say they are things, since they do impinge on the senses. So I think that 'hazard' is a reasonable generic term for these potentially harmful things. Energy transfer from a source to a person or property is not the only way harm can occur. You may think that the example of liquid nitrogen, which will *extract* energy from your finger if you are careless, is trivial, but what about chemical and biological agents? I hope you will agree that carbon monoxide is hazardous, and it extracts (minute amounts of) energy in doing harm to people, and so does Plasmodium, giving them malaria in exchange. > >The next time you're in a discussion, and the word >"hazard" is used, listen carefully and try to >understand its definition in the context of the >discussion. As the discussion progresses, the >definition may change! That may happen to other words as well, unless the group members are all philosophers. If they are, of course, the discussion will not progress, but make circular tours ad infinitum. (;-) > >My professor said that we can't have understanding >unless we have the same meanings for the words we >use. He further said that we cannot do clear >thinking unless we have clear definitions for the >words we use. I think most would agree, but you major premise is that 'hazard' cannot be defined. I believe I have provided a viable definition, which is in any case close in meaning to your 'the "thing" that "can hurt you or do property damage,". Now, is IEC TC108 a "thing" or not? (;-) -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK If at first you don't succeed, delegate. But I support unbloated email http://www.asciiribbon.org/ - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]>
