It is more difficult to designate this form of conation on its practical side by a satisfactory name.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think we've seen a lot of examples of giving a name its own definition in the dot-com world. Amazon, Google, Yahoo - these are names we never would have dreamed major corporations would choose.
There is no principle worth the name if it is not wholly good.
When we use terms we get confused, yet we have no other way.
There's a lot of interesting words, nomenclatures, in science.
To spell out the obvious is often to call it in question.
To speak about notation as the only way that you can guarantee structure of course is already very suspect.
Ambiguity is very interesting in writing; it's not very interesting in science.
Words fashioned with somewhat over precise diction are like shapes turned out by a cookie cutter.
Usually it is uses of words, not words in themselves, that are properly called vague.
Proper names are rigid designators.