Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!pacbell!well!fico2!everexn!karen
From: karen@everexn.uucp (Karen Valentino)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: A Hum Domain
Keywords: Objectivism, philosophy, sci.*
Message-ID: <1990Feb5.003806.13410@everexn.uucp>
Date: 5 Feb 90 00:38:06 GMT
References: <3284@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <3285@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <9442@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <7346@tank.uchicago.edu> <1990Feb1.005817.1786@everexn.uucp> <7402@tank.uchicago.edu>
Organization: Everex Systems, Inc.
Lines: 70

rwt1@tank.uchicago.edu (Robert Tracinski) draws a distinction between
the hard sciences and what I've been calling "Other Sciences" by
calling the other sciences "human sciences", i.e. the humanities
(those concerned witht he study of human nature).  He goes on to say:

>It includes any science whose main subject is man, not from a
>(purely) physical standpoint (i.e. not biology), but from the a standpoint 
>which takes into account the nature of the human mind, and the realm of human
>values and action.  I based my recommendation for putting *PO in sci on the 
>basis of the fact that all of the other human sciences are there, and, in the
>absence of a more fitting hierarchy, I consider those arguments conclusive. 
 
In the "human sciences"--great phrase, BTW--there is more room for 
disagreement than in the hard sciences, because the information that 
is taken in in the human sciences is primarily empirical--based on 
observation and experience.  Different people perceive things differently, 
which often makes for lively fla--er, discussion.  After all of the noise 
that has been generated by *p.o. I can *definitely* see that talk is a more 
appropriate hierarchy than sci for this proposed group.  (Of course, it's 
my *perception* only.)   But I like the idea of hum.p.o. much better 
than either sci or talk.

I'd like to hear from some other people--especially those who have
more experience than I do on Usenet--about the idea of having a
hum hierarchy.  I like the idea for a couple of reasons.  

First, it seems to answer my desire for a place for Other Sciences 
(sciences that aren't hard sciences).  It's a very appropriate name that 
speaks to the subjective and human-oriented nature of the disciplines 
involved.  

Second, I would think it would be useful for system administrators.  
I'm assuming that the more subjective sciences would generate more "talk" 
than hard sciences; so that sysadmins who are concerned about disk space 
or are under orders to take in only the more technically-oriented groups 
could eliminate the hum domain.  But hum would be very desirable for some 
sysadmins, such as those who are at universities.

>Somebody raised the idea of a hum.* hierarchy.  Sounds good to me.  That way,
>all of the defenders of the "sci is just for experimental sciences" viewpoint
>are satisfied, and the proponents of SPO don't get dumped in talk.

I agree about this, and I don't think of it as a compromise.  I think
that it is more fitting for groups in the "subjective" sciences to
be in a domain that speaks to their experiential nature than to be in
sci.

>Under such a system, what would talk be for?  For discussion of specific 
>political issues (e.g. talk.abortion) or other topics which are too narrow
>to qualify as sciences.  That's just a start--perhaps someone can suggest a 
>more positive criterion?

I like this idea, too.  I think of talk groups as being issue-oriented,
though I realize there are newsgroups in talk that don't quite fit this
description.  Although there are newsgroups in other domains that deal 
with issues, those groups tend to focus on general laws and principles 
*for their subject* as applied *to* the issue being discussed.

Looking at the subject header that I just wrote, I'm wondering if
someone is going to call it, "the ho-hum domain!"  "The hum-drum
domain?"  "Hum-bug?"  Still, I really love the name.  "Humanities"
is both broad and descriptive, which is what's needed for a top-level
name.

Karen
-- 
   Karen Valentino  <>  Everex North (Everex Systems)  <>  Sebastopol, CA
      karen@everexn.uu.net      ..{apple, well}!fico2!everexn!karen

	  "The best way out is always through."  Robert Frost