Where does workability collide?

In pragmatist philosophy workability is the criterion of truth: an idea is held true in so far as believing it works: it guides action successfully, fits with other beliefs and with experience, and pays its way in practical consequences. In Pragmatism (1907) William James argued that truth is not a static copy of reality but something that happens to an idea through its workability, its capacity to carry us satisfactorily from one part of experience to another. The referent is an epistemic standard for evaluating beliefs, and it is a different construct from the flow behaviour of fresh concrete that shares the word.[1]

Unit

The degree to which believing an idea leads to successful action and coherent experience

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Judged by whether a belief guides action successfully and coheres with further experience, not by any instrument

In concrete technology workability describes how easily a fresh mix can be mixed, transported, placed, compacted, and finished for its intended use without segregating or bleeding. Tattersall's Workability and quality control of concrete argues that the single word stands for a composite of rheological properties (broadly a yield stress and a plastic viscosity), which is why a single slump figure captures it only roughly. The referent is a property of the fresh, not-yet-set material, tied to the work needed to consolidate it, and it is unrelated to the pragmatist meaning of an idea that works.[2]

Unit

The ease of placing and compacting a fresh mix, underlain by its yield stress and plastic viscosity

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Assessed by slump, flow, Vebe time, and compacting-factor tests, or more fundamentally by rheometer measures of yield stress and viscosity