vault backup: 2025-12-17 07:13:01

2025-12-17.md

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+---
+id:
+aliases: []
+title: 2025-12-17
+tags:
+  - authorship/original
+  - destiny/permanent
+  - status/draft
+  - type/daily
+---
+# 2025-12-17
+
+## 2025-12-17 05:39
+
+One aspect of estimating that I find most interesting,
+but that is criminally understudied,
+is the effect of building dimensions
+(footprint shape, floor area, stories, height)
+on total cost.
+
+Unfortunately, lack of interest in the subject extends beyond estimating.
+Discourse on spatial data seems to fall into one of two bins:
+* civil engineering
+* n-dimensional mathematics[^1]
+neither are readily applicable to building construction.
+
+[^1]: worse still, the "space" studied in such disciplines is
+    [vector space](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_space)
+    where "distance" is a measure of similarity
+    and physical geometry is rarely considered.
+
+Of the two, pure math would be be preferred---being generally more rigorous---
+but the first bin far outweighs the second.
+See the difference in content from [geostatistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostatistics)
+to the conceivably far more broad [spatial statistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_statistics).
+
+> [!quote] [Geographic data and information](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_data_and_information)
+> **Spatial data** or **spatial information** is broader class of data
+> whose geometry is relevant
+> but it is not necessarily [georeferenced](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georeferenced "Georeferenced"),
+> such as in computer-aided design (CAD),
+> see [geometric modeling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_modeling "Geometric modeling").
+
+### Common Fallacies
+
+* [Reification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_(fallacy))
+
+    > [!quote]
+    > **Reification** ... is a fallacy of ambiguity,
+    > ...it is the error of treating something that is not concrete...
+    > as a concrete thing.
+
+    See ["the map is not the territory"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map-territory_relation "Map-territory relation").
+
+    > [!aside]
+    > This one is very common among my peers in estimating.
+    > The problem with fallacies, of course,
+    > is that you can't simply say "Reification fallacy, booyah".
+    > If some one is overgeneralizing,
+    > they likely just have a different understanding of the term.
+    > Certainty of definition only occurs with some quorum,
+    > and I'd argue most of [[construction-estimating|ours]] don't meet it,
+    > and that the choice of any term over another ought to be based on utility.
+    >
+    > > Note also that a term's definition can be certain ~~on some axis~~,
+    > > but ambiguous ~~on another~~.
+    > > See ["I know it when I see it"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it)
+    > > which, as far as I'm concerned, is a perfectly legitimate definition.
+
+* [Equivocation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation "Equivocation")
+
+    The misleading use of a word with more than one meaning
+
+* [Composition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition "Fallacy of composition")
+
+    Assuming a whole has a property because its parts have that property
+
+* [Division](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division "Fallacy of division")
+
+    Assuming parts have a property because the whole has that property
+
+> [!quote] [Category mistake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_mistake)
+> An example is a person learning that the game of cricket involves team spirit,
+> and after being given a demonstration of each player's role,
+> asking which player performs the "team spirit".