Do you consider a SAK to be a multitool?
Total Members Voted 18
Voting closed: October 12, 2006, 01:24:25 AM
Following your logic a Leatherman should be called Leathermultitool and only be used on Leather items...
Not sure how you get that Leatherman is named after Tim Leatherman back at you
Didn't think so. My post was intentionally ridiculous to show the flawed logic in your comment. Just because a product is called "Swiss Army Knife" doesn't mean it can't be a multi tool and has to be a knife. The same way a product that is named "Leatherman" doesn't have to be a guy working with leather or a tool that is only made for leather working. But it is ok. It is not the first time I see you commenting in a dismissive way in topics that are related to Victorinox products or the people that use them. From now on I will just ignore them.
can't disagree!Also agreed!To take it to the extreme, imagine an XAVT with no blades....(Image removed from quote.)It would still be thicker than a swisschamp, and I dare anyone to call it not-a-SAK
A SAK is the mother of all multitiools!Enough said!
In reality I think this is one of those interesting debates that will never have a right answer.
Sometimes there is no single "right" answer, and looking for one is where the trouble occurs.A frequent problem is that some people firmly believe that their personal OPINION is somehow "the" correct and only fact - spoiler alert, opinions are often not actual facts.Then when they try to claim their opinion is an objective "truth", but someone else holds a quite different opinion, then there can be a clash as both parties seem to forget that they are trying to enforce their opinion on someone else. Sometimes on-line discussions can get quite heated due to the limited bandwith and time delays, whereas a similar discussion held face to face could be rather more civil.ETTO and all that - have a look at the quote in my signature block ....
I would have to respectfully disagree here....... (though the underlying condition is that the rules are agreed upon).
And I must respectfully disagree with your opinion. But I am enjoying the discussion, so have at it .... AFAIK the rules for this particular discussion have NOT been agreed on, so until then this discussion can never be resolved to a single "objective" truth (and I have my doubts even if it were possible to agree on a set of comprehensive rules - see below). From what I've seen so far, I'm not going to hold my breath while I wait for a harmonious consensus on "the rules for classifying SAKs & MultiTools" to appear.If I look closely at your example of the taxonomy of living creatures, I see that some areas are frequently subject to endless "discussions" between the lumpers and the splitters, so there is no single, objective, "truth", merely a (temporary ? ) consensus amongst the currently most influential classifiers (in other words, they all hold the same opinion about something and have agreed to accept it - for the time being at least). Also the objective "truth" of a particular classification or group of classifications is often subject to quite a radical revision as new information becomes available (eg previously unknown DNA links), so even with general agreement there is no immutable, fixed-for-life, objective "truth" in any particular taxanomic classification.For me an objective "truth" is something much less disputable, perhaps something like:"When I compare lead with water, lead has always appeared to be more dense, but having said that I make no claims about anyone else's experiences"
Oh this is fun and illuminating!!And well done for keeping it informed and civil my MT.o friends Do you think Oxford University would accept me for a Ph.D in Multitool Classification and Taxonomy - I guess I could throw in a little MT History - to make it a bit more worthwhile!
Bell pepper is a fruit, Eggplant is a fruit, This is a fact, It's not a matter of opinion... even though some people believe that pepper is a vegetable and use it as such.
If you want to talk about taxonomy, Peppers are neither - they're a Berry. As are tomatoes, pumpkins, bananas... (Raspberries and strawberries are not berries, they are aggregate fruits)Whether something is referred to as a fruit or berry often has little in common with it's botanical classification.
What we are discussing is the validity of the purported "fact" thereafter.
A classification is not a fact; it is a label we apply to something in a way that makes the most sense.To me that makes it more of an opinion, although I don't think all opinions have equal value.