"Andy Evans" wrote in message
...
And why is a name that *might* bear some relationship to the shape any
more
"direct" than one that gives some idea of what the thing does?

Because over 3/4 of the population are "sensing" in terms of Jung's
typology - they use the information that comes directly from their
senses rather than theorising. What an object does is a further level
up in terms of child development, for instance, than what an object
simply looks like. In other words function is on a conceptual level
while image is mostly on the level of basic perception.


What a load of irelevant cobblers! People call this thing a valve, a tube, a
bottle, or whatever, because that's what they were taught to call it. Nine
times out of ten they never even begin to think about "why" it's called what
it's called.

After the complete load of twaddle that was your last post you certainly do
seem to have a knack for talking total bull****. :-)

David.