Inclusive the hard way

I may or may not ever have tangled with RX but I understood clearly enough when he said he was talking about a chisel edge and used the word "inclusive." It isn't rocket science.
 
RX-79G
Sorry to see how logic fails to sprout sometimes. I would have given up long ago. Just not worth it.

I also prefer universal terms which can always be applied without having to use a bunch of ifs and buts.
But accounting for different points of views will help you when talking with less logically inclined.
Just write out the whole thing in 2 sentences instead of 2 words and everybody will get what kind of angle you mean. I know it doesn't feel very efficient but how often do you have to do that? Probably much less often in your life than all the text typed in here.

I also like to argue stuff to get some new insights in some things. The thing is here is none to be had. Your approach is logically flawless and if some fail to get it that's fine too, however I suspect they are just pretending ;)

In case you want to go on maybe you could visualize it better by making a table showing pictures of 20 different angles and then describing them your way and in the next row the other guy's way. That should show which one is easier more universal and doesn't have to use extra words for special cases.

Even negative angles can happen on one side. Just picture 7 degree hollow on one side and the other side 45 straight. Just calling it "inclusive 38" will be able to describe it the same way like "normal edges" no need to change terminology there. Similar for 0 degree on one side and 38 on the other.
Or 19 left and 19 right. Angle wise it's all the same and the "inclusive" information helps the user to know it's not just some sharpening angle from one side. Why make an exception for only chisel grinds? They are described well with an inclusive angle just as any other edge shape. Why make this exception if it doesn't add any information?

Anyways really scientific would be to write angles like that (-7,45) ; (0,38) ; (19,19) this way the edge angles are described very well and everybody can deduct if its some chisel, V or weird edge. It also includes the sharpening angle for every side. :eek:
On top of that we could agree on that the left angle in brackets is the one on the left side of the knife when looking in cutting direction. And the other angle the one on the right.

If nobody objects we can submit that idea to the Board of American Knives Industry Standards. Oh wait there isn't any. Will probably argue a few pages more and not get anywhere.
What a waste :p
 
Jens Schuetz said:
RX-79G
Sorry to see how logic fails to sprout sometimes. I would have given up long ago. Just not worth it.

I also prefer universal terms which can always be applied without having to use a bunch of ifs and buts.
But accounting for different points of views will help you when talking with less logically inclined.
Just write out the whole thing in 2 sentences instead of 2 words and everybody will get what kind of angle you mean. I know it doesn't feel very efficient but how often do you have to do that? Probably much less often in your life than all the text typed in here.

I also like to argue stuff to get some new insights in some things. The thing is here is none to be had. Your approach is logically flawless and if some fail to get it that's fine too, however I suspect they are just pretending ;)

In case you want to go on maybe you could visualize it better by making a table showing pictures of 20 different angles and then describing them your way and in the next row the other guy's way. That should show which one is easier more universal and doesn't have to use extra words for special cases.

Even negative angles can happen on one side. Just picture 7 degree hollow on one side and the other side 45 straight. Just calling it "inclusive 38" will be able to describe it the same way like "normal edges" no need to change terminology there. Similar for 0 degree on one side and 38 on the other.
Or 19 left and 19 right. Angle wise it's all the same and the "inclusive" information helps the user to know it's not just some sharpening angle from one side. Why make an exception for only chisel grinds? They are described well with an inclusive angle just as any other edge shape. Why make this exception if it doesn't add any information?

Anyways really scientific would be to write angles like that (-7,45) ; (0,38) ; (19,19) this way the edge angles are described very well and everybody can deduct if its some chisel, V or weird edge. It also includes the sharpening angle for every side. :eek:
On top of that we could agree on that the left angle in brackets is the one on the left side of the knife when looking in cutting direction. And the other angle the one on the right.

If nobody objects we can submit that idea to the Board of American Knives Industry Standards. Oh wait there isn't any. Will probably argue a few pages more and not get anywhere.
What a waste :p
Click to expand...

Thank you for your support.

I did mention the negative angle somewhere on earlier in the thread, wondering what makes zero so special. Maybe I should blame the ancient Greeks.
 
Ugh, semantics :barf:

Basically everyone knew what OP meant. Just answer the question like a human being.

[video=youtube;fVDOB9mby_w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVDOB9mby_w[/video]
 
RX-79G said:
Here:

and here:


Dave appears to be saying that it isn't even the angles involved, it is whether your sharpen it on both sides. So Emerson's non-chisel ground knives one would not refer to their inclusive edge angle.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding Dave. Are you saying that he is implying if the angles are not even than inclusive wouldn't apply (excluding 0 of course)

I don't understand what you mean by "sharpen it on both sides" You don't sharpen a side, you grind the sides to a certain angle which creates a vertex, thus creating a sharp edge at the point of intersection. - I'm not trying to be obtuse, I just want to make sure you misspoke and I am not missing your point.
 
Jens Schuetz said:
RX-79G
Sorry to see how logic fails to sprout sometimes. I would have given up long ago. Just not worth it.

I also prefer universal terms which can always be applied without having to use a bunch of ifs and buts.
But accounting for different points of views will help you when talking with less logically inclined.
Just write out the whole thing in 2 sentences instead of 2 words and everybody will get what kind of angle you mean. I know it doesn't feel very efficient but how often do you have to do that? Probably much less often in your life than all the text typed in here.

I also like to argue stuff to get some new insights in some things. The thing is here is none to be had. Your approach is logically flawless and if some fail to get it that's fine too, however I suspect they are just pretending ;)

In case you want to go on maybe you could visualize it better by making a table showing pictures of 20 different angles and then describing them your way and in the next row the other guy's way. That should show which one is easier more universal and doesn't have to use extra words for special cases.

Even negative angles can happen on one side. Just picture 7 degree hollow on one side and the other side 45 straight. Just calling it "inclusive 38" will be able to describe it the same way like "normal edges" no need to change terminology there. Similar for 0 degree on one side and 38 on the other.
Or 19 left and 19 right. Angle wise it's all the same and the "inclusive" information helps the user to know it's not just some sharpening angle from one side. Why make an exception for only chisel grinds? They are described well with an inclusive angle just as any other edge shape. Why make this exception if it doesn't add any information?

Anyways really scientific would be to write angles like that (-7,45) ; (0,38) ; (19,19) this way the edge angles are described very well and everybody can deduct if its some chisel, V or weird edge. It also includes the sharpening angle for every side. :eek:
On top of that we could agree on that the left angle in brackets is the one on the left side of the knife when looking in cutting direction. And the other angle the one on the right.

If nobody objects we can submit that idea to the Board of American Knives Industry Standards. Oh wait there isn't any. Will probably argue a few pages more and not get anywhere.
What a waste :p
Click to expand...

Jens,

I agree with everything you wrote. Of course a chiseled grind has an inclusive edge. I (and Dave I believe) was just pointing out that almost no one uses that term when speaking about that particular grind. The reasoning behind this, is the same reason people started using the word inclusive to begin with. To differentiate between one side, and the sum of both sides, when speaking of sharpening. Since that does not apply to a chisel, it is never used. No one is arguing the technicality of it. Do you agree?
 
I'll never be able to recover the 5 minutes I lost reading this thread... For some reason I couldn't stop and ending up really enjoying it
 
egally08 said:
Jens,

I agree with everything you wrote. Of course a chiseled grind has an inclusive edge. I (and Dave I believe) was just pointing out that almost no one uses that term when speaking about that particular grind. The reasoning behind this, is the same reason people started using the word inclusive to begin with. To differentiate between one side, and the sum of both sides, when speaking of sharpening. Since that does not apply to a chisel, it is never used. No one is arguing the technicality of it. Do you agree?
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
egally08 said:
Jens,

I agree with everything you wrote. Of course a chiseled grind has an inclusive edge. I (and Dave I believe) was just pointing out that almost no one uses that term when speaking about that particular grind. The reasoning behind this, is the same reason people started using the word inclusive to begin with. To differentiate between one side, and the sum of both sides, when speaking of sharpening. Since that does not apply to a chisel, it is never used. No one is arguing the technicality of it. Do you agree?
Click to expand...
I agree that IF in a particular discussion it is already clear that ppl are talking about a chisel grind then there is no need to say inclusive in order to specify that it's some whole edge and not just one side of it.
Still saying inclusive all the time would be right in all cases. Not very necessary in a few exceptional cases, but still correct all the time.
When in Germany I also never say Celsius. 20 degrees is just understood to be Celsius and not Fahrenheit. However I could say Celsius there and everywhere else in the world and everybody would know all the time what I mean. Just more universal and no worries about special cases where people talk about Fahrenheit and could misunderstand me. More scientifically correct so to speak.
 
egally08 said:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding Dave. Are you saying that he is implying if the angles are not even than inclusive wouldn't apply (excluding 0 of course)

I don't understand what you mean by "sharpen it on both sides" You don't sharpen a side, you grind the sides to a certain angle which creates a vertex, thus creating a sharp edge at the point of intersection. - I'm not trying to be obtuse, I just want to make sure you misspoke and I am not missing your point.
Click to expand...
You really don't know what he means by "sharpen on both sides"? I call BS. You are just splicing words.
 
BenchCo Spydermade said:
You really don't know what he means by "sharpen on both sides"? I call BS. You are just splicing words.
Click to expand...

Emerson has three grinds - I posted a picture earlier. One of them has primary grinds on both sides, but all three are only sharpened on one side. That's Emerson's philosophy and he'll void your warranty if you sharpen the other side.

Dave did say "sharpen on one side" where I quoted him. Dealer's choice whether you decide he was talking about consumer sharpening or factory grinding. Whether the primary bevel is angled or not on the non-sharpening side, you do only need to worry about the sharpening side bevel when sharpening.

But we talk about all sorts of things on Bladeforums besides oiling and sharpening - like heat treatment, grind angles, etc. We just need good language to talk about those things in a consistent manner. As Jens so eloquently pointed out.
 
you guys need to look up the meaning of pedantic not inclusive. wow. Inclusive in knife grinding means both angles added evenly, a 90/10 isn't inclusive, its just 90/10 grind, unless your being pedantic and ignoring what it means in knife making/grinding. A real chisel grind is 0 on one side, therefor not inclusive. You can argue the exact meaning of inclusive all you want but its reeeeeeallllly easy for knife making, if you have a 30" inclusive its 15 per side, 20 is 10 per side, if its not then just say its a 80/20 grind or whatever, or if its a chisel just say chisel grind at 30'. Is really not hard. If you want to figure your grind angle out get the tools to do so, or regrind to whatever you want then you'll know exactly what it is.
 
hodges said:
you guys need to look up the meaning of pedantic not inclusive. wow. Inclusive in knife grinding means both angles added evenly, a 90/10 isn't inclusive, its just 90/10 grind, unless your being pedantic and ignoring what it means in knife making/grinding. A real chisel grind is 0 on one side, therefor not inclusive. You can argue the exact meaning of inclusive all you want but its reeeeeeallllly easy for knife making, if you have a 30" inclusive its 15 per side, 20 is 10 per side, if its not then just say its a 80/20 grind or whatever, or if its a chisel just say chisel grind at 30'. Is really not hard. If you want to figure your grind angle out get the tools to do so, or regrind to whatever you want then you'll know exactly what it is.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that definition?
 
for the others who weren't sure... Pedantic: "someone who is too concerned with literal accuracy or formality" ...online dictionary, so I think that's fitting for this thread. I had to look it up as I hadn't heard the term pedantic angle in 20 plus years of making knives and I couldn't find a definition for pedantic angle. I could find inclusive however and "including everything concerned" is part of it which would suggest all angles and sides, but really is it a big deal?

this is one of the worst argument threads I have ever read, but I couldn't stop and had to see where it went. who cares if a word may or may not be required or usually used... if it's not incorrect how did it end up taking 5 pages of bickering to get absolutely nowhere?
 
Gosh, I don't care to include myself into this mess.
Couldn't get past the first ten posts or so...
Silliness!
 
rustyrazor said:
this is one of the worst argument threads I have ever read, but I couldn't stop and had to see where it went. who cares if a word may or may not be required or usually used... if it's not incorrect how did it end up taking 5 pages of bickering to get absolutely nowhere?
Click to expand...

I agree. I feel ridiculous arguing over something so trivial, to the point I wasn't sure if I was being trolled or not.

However, with the incessant questionings and examples, this thread felt like an open sore in my mouth - I know I should leave it alone but I just can't stop licking it.
 
It took me less time to learn how to sharpen a blade on a bench stone than it did to read this thread. It is rather simple to do. Sharpie on the edge with light pressure on a fine bench stone. A fine/ultra fine stone won't ruin your blade while learning which could take as little as ten minutes. You can then sharpen anything, angles don't matter. Thank me later.
 
egally08 said:
I agree. I feel ridiculous arguing over something so trivial, to the point I wasn't sure if I was being trolled or not.

However, with the incessant questionings and examples, this thread felt like an open sore in my mouth - I know I should leave it alone but I just can't stop licking it.
Click to expand...
lol... don't pick it and it'll heal. I am guilty of the same thing, but I'm taking the advice of your ole buddy Mark next time and staying out rather than findin a way to get out.
 
DAVE_M said:
Then they would not be inclusive, as there is only one edge bevel. To say a chisel grind has ___ degree inclusive edge, is improper use of the word inclusive.
Click to expand...

It would still be inclusive. Zero degrees on one side plus whatever bevel angle on the bevel side is still inclusive. Unless it's just a two dimensional knife, then all you'd have is one side.

When talking about bevel angles, inclusive means the sum of the bevel angles on both sides, whatever the values may be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top