Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryandrake | Hacker News Reader

When flying visually (VFR), taxiway lighting and runway lighting are visually very different. Taxiway lighting is almost always blue, whereas runway lighting is white (with any displaced threshold marked with red lights). In daylight, the markings on the runway are unmistakably different.

I'm not instrument rated but my understanding is that with ILS, instrument approaches can handle multiple parallel runways precisely and therefore the pilot has the tools necessary to distinguish between a runway and taxiway when in instrument conditions. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Let the investigation happen, but from the reported facts, this seems to be a pretty clear case of pilot error.

And I think you meant to say "raises the question" rather than "begs the question."

View on HN

With all due respect, blue and white seem like terrible colors to pick if they are supposed to be clearly distinguishable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

I’m intrigued by the question of what you were hoping to add to the conversation with a Wikipedia link with zero explanatory text.

Did you mean “look, some people think popular usage has won out and beg the question is now a reasonable substitute for raise the question”? Or something else?

Haha, thanks! Will fix that last bit.

So many people use 'begs the question' as 'raises the question' now that it's a valid meaning for the phrase.

EDIT: To the downvoters: I don't think you understand how human language works.

Does not something wrong enough times doesn’t make it correct.

For example using “because” without a preposition doesn’t become correct just because Buzzfeed makes it popular.

People make grammar/useage mistakes not because they consciously want to change the language but because they don’t know any differently. It’s quite different than how slang enters a language. Begs vs. raises the question isn’t some kind of colloquial thing, it’s just a misuse. I get things wrong when the language frequently enough, but when it’s pointed out, I don’t continue doing it; in fact, I am happy for the opportunity to increase my precision with the language.

People don't have to consciously want to change the language for it to change. It's not like the differences between modern English and Victorian-era English are all because someone willed it. Usage dictates meaning, and I'd say the general public uses 'begs the question' as 'raises the question', whereas only people interested in philosophy use it as 'presume the answer' - essentially the latter version has become a sort of jargon regarding fallacies.

It's like the word 'irregardless'. As much as 'it isn't a word', it clearly is, because you know what is meant when it's said, and plenty of people say it.

>Does not something wrong enough times doesn’t make it correct.

This isn't true in natural language. Do something enough times -- 'wrong' or 'right' -- and it becomes a part of the language. Like it or not.

Crack an Oxford English Dictionary sometime. Look up your favorite word. Notice that there will be tens of different definitions, including a historical trace of 'first uses' through semantic changes, for the single word.

>People make grammar/useage mistakes not because they consciously want to change the language but because they don’t know any differently

Consciously or not, they are changing the language. Language isn't a fixed thing with unbreakable rules. It is mutable. A language is however people use it; it isn't a thing to know in its entirety before using.

'begs the question' is a bad translation of petitio principii, which is itself a bad translation from a greek text. The general usage of the term is the only correct interpretation. The phrase seems to be a trap for a certain category of pedants.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com