DragonMaci Posted September 2, 2007 Report Share Posted September 2, 2007 I was thinking of doing a software based objective dictionary at some stage, but a friend recommended I do a wiki. This seems like a good idea. Would anyone be interested in contributing to it? Note: I am going to have tight moderation controls, so as to avoid the potential problem of non-objective definitions making it into the dictionary, which might happen if just any uder can add definitions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 5, 2007 Report Share Posted September 5, 2007 Sure, I can help you set it up/administer it if you wish. I am also offering to help you add stuff to it. I assume it will be a MediaWiki based Wiki? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted September 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2007 Sure, I can help you set it up/administer it if you wish. I am also offering to help you add stuff to it. I assume it will be a MediaWiki based Wiki? Thank you for the offer. I will need to learn some net languages and how to use Visual Web Developer/Visual Studio to make web pages before I begin. As for the wiki, I haven't decided. I need to look at a few first. I don't even recognise that name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 10, 2007 Report Share Posted September 10, 2007 Wikipedia was derived from Mediawiki software, just to give you some idea of what it is like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted September 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2007 Ah, ok, thanks. I will be sure to look into it then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenure Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Also, don't we have an OO.net wiki? I'd like to write for your wiki, but I don't feel I've even scratched the surface of the kind of integration needed to provide, cogent, intelligent and above all, interesting entries for a wiki. It would be a very interesting experiment though, especially when filling in the topic 'Certainty', and seeing the whole debate kick off with Betsy again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Yes I am fairly certain it would be very interesting. Or am I? :-P We do have an OO.NET wiki of course. However I think Kanes idea might be of some merit too. Though it strikes me whether a wiki as such is needed, it might be better to make a system which is really more simplistic in many ways and more suited to the task. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Okay, gents: what is an objective dictionary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Kane (DragonMaci) has already discussed this with me, so I know what he has in mind. However I forgot that its not otherwise so clear to everyone else. From what Kane has told me it is dictionary providing more objective (precise, useful etc) definitions than in a standard dictionary. I will let Kane give more details however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenure Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Will anti-concepts be included, for clarification of what those kinds of words really entail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Thats actually not a bad idea Tenure. I dont know if he plans to include them, but perhaps he should include at least some of the worst of them, maybe in another secton? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 From what Kane has told me it is dictionary providing more objective (precise, useful etc) definitions than in a standard dictionary.I understand precision, but I wonder what the standard for evaluating "useful" would be -- useful for what? If it's separated from the purpose "clearly express propositions to English speakers", then okay, but once you start mucking around in social and communicative issues, that's a big festering mess that isn't pleasant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted September 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Also, don't we have an OO.net wiki? I am trying to define words not Objectivism, so many of the words won't appear in the OO.net wiki. I'd like to write for your wiki, but I don't feel I've even scratched the surface of the kind of integration needed to provide, cogent, intelligent and above all, interesting entries for a wiki. It would be a very interesting experiment though, especially when filling in the topic 'Certainty', and seeing the whole debate kick off with Betsy again. You are welcome to participate. There will be no contributor/user "debates" though. However, the decision of me and my moderators to make edits can be debated if you can rationally explain why we are wrong and you are right. Though it strikes me whether a wiki as such is needed, it might be better to make a system which is really more simplistic in many ways and more suited to the task. I think it is a good way to get something out their before I have enough definitions to compile the dictionary. But if you have a better way to do it, then please say what it is. Okay, gents: what is an objective dictionary? A lot of modern dictionaries, and even some old ones like my DoubleDay 1979 dictionary, are flawed. They have subjective, inaccurate, non-precise, unclear defitions. A lot of definitions contradict the purpose of language, which is clear communication. Not all words in the dictionaries are like that, but many are. This allpies to book based ones, software based ones like WordWeb, and online ones like AskOxford. I want to make a dictionary that has objective, accurate, precise, clear defitions. My dictionary will be an attempt to have words that fit the purpose of language. I want a dictionary that has definitions for words like slefish and greed that are not properly defined these days. Will anti-concepts be included, for clarification of what those kinds of words really entail? Yes, Rory, but with there is clarification that they are an anti-concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Well perhaps I should say more precise and easier to apply in the sense that it is easier to apply the definitions to real entities/events etc etc. Useful might not be the best word to have used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted September 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I would like to add: definitions more concretely tied to reality, not the floating abstracts you get today that have no concrete connection to reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus98876 Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 For those that might still be tracking this, and interested in the project: Me and Kane have agreed to see if a more specialized solution works better (not to belittle any of the great Wiki software out there, I'm just not convinced they are as suitable for this). Hopefully we can get some sort of system up for testing before too much longer if me and Kane can agree on a system. I thought I might help Kane out by asking if anyone has feature requests he could consider? I don't think Kane has asked that yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidV Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 You might find the "Introduction to the Objectivist Analytic Dictionary" interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted October 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2007 This project it dead. I killed it. I just don't have the inclination or time to do this on top of my other projects, namely my books and Writer's Office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.