刚看完这篇文章A Matter of Scope，真的佩服笑来老师的逻辑，清晰而且定义的准确。这篇文章把在讨论问题的时候的scope讲的很清楚。
换句话说，我们讨论一个问题的时候，一定要把它的范围规定清楚。文中举的例子就很清楚，
What if I assume “a Mac is better than a PC”? Some might agree, whereas others might even get angry.
If I assume that “a Mac is better than a PC for me“, who cares?
It's a matter of scope. 这句话说在点子上了，范围变了之后整个问题马上就不一样了，就像文中举的例子一样，Which are better? Motorcycles or cars?
It seems vague to answer this question. However, If you change the question to "Which are better? Motorcycles or cars ... in terms of safety?"
Then the question become clear.
To me, the question can even become like this in the first place: "Which are safer? Motorcycles or cars? " this will wipe out the ambiguity part of the problem. Because "better" has much larger scope compare to "safer", it has variety of areas that can be contributed as better. For example, colors, driver experiences, comfort, fuel efficiency etc. On the contrary, safer only has one area compare to that. So it is a matter of scope.
网友评论