The Orthotomeo Project Blog

As the development of the Orthotomeo Project continues specific terminology for describing the content of the database is unfolding. This table will be updated periodically to reflect this process. The post Thoughts on Terminology was just a beginning. Any suggestions are welcome.

Unfortunately, I’ve not adhered to these definitions in many of the posts, my apologies. I’ve often used the term interpretation interchangeably with reason and principle. I’ve also used the term proposition where statement should have been used. I hope this helps avoid some confusion.

Term	Definition	Status
Statement	A thing that can be interpreted such as a proposition, historical event, element of reality etc. See also Propositions and Statements. This is the first of two cornerstones in the Orthotomeo DB structure, see The Black Box.	As of 9-Feb-2011 this is official.
Application	The argumentation, reasoning and interpretive principles used for logically moving from one statement or set of statements to another. This is the second cornerstone of the Orthotomeo DB structure, see The Black Box. An application is comprised of a mandatory interpretive principle and an optional explanation of the reasoning behind the use of the principle.	As of 9-Feb-2011 this is official.
Reason	The specific reasoning behind a particular interpretation. It explains why and how a general interpretive principle is applicable to a specific situation. It is preferable that a reason be given but its use is not mandatory.	As of 9-Feb-2011 this is official.
Principle	A general principle which is being applied in a specific interpretation. This is mandatory for an interpretation. Only one principle is allowed. If several principles are desired they must first be grouped together in a set and then applied as a unit.	As of 9-Feb-2011 this is official.
Interpretation	Defined as – The triad of Statement(s) -> Application -> Statement	Although this this term has this specific definition it can also be used to refer to set of interpretations making up larger segments of the DB structure. Unfortunately, it is likely unavoidable that it will also be used as a synonym for principle, reason and application. As of 9-Feb-2011 this is official.
Atom / Atomization	The Orthotomeo DB structure will need to contain simple atomic nodes (statements and reasons) which can be used individually and also combined into more complex structures, which in turn can be viewed as individual units. For example the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy is made up of individual articles which in and of themselves could be used as an interpretive principle. But at the same time the Declaration in its entirety could also be used for this purpose. Other examples would be principles of translation (grammer, etymology etc.), and denominational creeds. I need a term to refer to the individual building blocks as well as the process of converting a complex node into its component parts.	Still very much in flux.
Conglomeration / Emergence	This is the counterpart of atom/atomization. A term will be needed to refer to complex nodes and the process of combining individual nodes into complex units.	Still very much in flux. Not to happy with conglomeration. Emergence is perhaps better but it hints at the process of an emerging unit which emerges out of its component parts to become more than a simple compilation. In sports terminology it is often said that a team is made up of more than its individuals. This is what I’m thining of with emergence.The concept of emergence will be needed but I’m reluctant to view every complex node in this way.
Conversion / Principalization / Activation	In the Orthotomeo DB Structure there will be times when a Statement should be converted or evolved into an interpretive principle. Interpretive principles are in essence also statements about reality. The difference is that Statements can be made about anything. Interpretive principles are statements about the process of interpretation. There will be cases where a particular viewpoint (statement/proposition) is determined logically but exists in the structure only as a statement. If one desires to use this principle for further interpretations there must be some sort of internal conversion which creates a principle out of the statement.	Still very much in flux. Not even sure principalization is even a proper term.