by Guest » Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:52 pm
[QUOTE][B]learning[/B]
[I]noun[/I]
[B]Definition of [I]LEARNING[/I][/B]
1
[B]:[/B] the act or experience of one that learns
2
[B]:[/B] knowledge or skill acquired by instruction or study
3
[B]:[/B] modification of a behavioral tendency by experience (as exposure to conditioning)
[/QUOTE][QUOTE][B]cal·i·brate[/B]
[I]verb[/I] \ˈka-lə-ˌbrāt\
[B]cal·i·brat·ed[/B][B]cal·i·brat·ing[/B]
[B]Definition of [I]CALIBRATE[/I][/B]
transitive verb
1
[B]:[/B] to ascertain the caliber of (as a thermometer tube)
2
[B]:[/B] to determine, rectify, or mark the graduations of (as a thermometer tube)
3
[B]:[/B] to standardize (as a measuring instrument) by determining the deviation from a standard so as to ascertain the proper correction factors
4
[B]:[/B] to adjust precisely for a particular function
5
[B]:[/B] to measure precisely; [I]especially[/I] [B]:[/B] to measure against a standard
[/QUOTE]Learning > Calibrating.
Learning encompasses all aspects of "game", while calibrating focuses on specific issues, i.e. SNL, closing, day game, strippers, etc...
Just because you can pull strippers, it doesn't mean you can walk into a college classroom and pull from there.
Since "game" is all encompassing for any situation, I believe learning is was the correct word to use, especially since all the references the article posted appeared to be macro level oriented. Besides, that was the point of the post... learning game is something that, specifically people who frequent this site, actually have problems with.
Since you are a programming guy: It's like when you have a nested loop, you trouble shoot each one, but if the first declaration is screwed up it doesn't matter, at all, how correct the syntax is for the ones inside.
If the basis of reason is flawed, everything you do from that point is flawed to some extent. It seems you are still thinking of it as all of one term. The point is, if you handle the macro level, suddenly everything else IS easy... including calibration.