2021-10-22
2021-03-031
-
The difference between vice and evil was a phenomenon that occurred in
-
What was referred to by the same word X was actually two nested concepts.
-
Thereby, a person looking at a narrow X thinks âA is not Xâ, while a person looking at a broad X thinks âA is Xâ.
-
This is related to: Relation Question.
- Itâs pretty abstract, though.
-
Are X and Y the same thing? Are they different?
-
seems to be neutral False dichotomy.
-
Iâm ruling out the possibility of implication or overlap.
- What you thought was one concept is two nested concepts
- This is more specious
- Close, but not equal to this case.
- This is one personâs case study
- I think this is essential.
- I think it is wrong to take meaning as a set in the first place.
- People recognize the meaning of a word by the representative case in their brain and the similarity to it.
- If we determine an appropriate threshold for that similarity, we can create a set, but we do not clearly recognize the threshold.
- Therefore, it becomes a âset with blurred boundariesâ as shown in the above figure.
- The phenomenon of âthe concept of X is a nested setâ as in this case is simply a difference in threshold values
- By comparing meanings among the aptitudes, the difference in thresholds can finally be visualized.
- (2023-02-04)
- Meaning is not a set.
- Meaning not a set with definite boundaries, but a blurred circle with Blurred Boundaries
- An extension of this is the ânon-numerical character of meaningâ as explained in 61fb7718aff09e00004a7667 on âThe Experience Process and the Creation of Meaningâ.
- Meaning is a vector. But itâs just a dot.
- The operation âA is Xâ becomes an exact match only.
- Rather, some representative vectors in the brain and the similarity to them
- Determining a threshold for this similarity results in a set
- (2023-02-04) But humans donât have a clear threshold, and they set boundaries somehow.
- It is like a self-organizing map where representative vectors take up space and create a boundary.
- We havenât even determined the degree of similarity.
- Ha, Wittgensteinâs familial resemblance says that meaning is not clearly defined as a set, but as a group connected by similarity!
-
Ludwig Wittgenstein, in his book âPhilosophical Investigations,â took the word âgameâ (German: Spiel) and pointed out that there is no common implication (significance) that characterizes all the extensions (objects) called âgames,â and that in fact they are only loosely connected as a whole by partially common features such as âwinning or losingâ and âentertainment value. He pointed out that there is no common inclusion (significance) that characterizes all the extensions (objects), and in fact, the whole is only loosely connected by partially common characteristics such as âwinning or losingâ and âentertainment,â which he named âfamily resemblance. This idea, together with prototype theory, is the antithesis of the classical view of categories, which attempts to define words in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions.
- Familial resemblance - Wikipedia
-
The idea is that the categories people actually have are not classical categories defined by necessary and sufficient conditions, but are characterized by typical cases and their similarity to them⊠For example, the word âbirdâ evokes small flying animals such as crows and sparrows, while ostriches and penguins are out of the typical case.
- Prototype theory - Wikipedia
-
- Iâve realized that meaning is not a set, and Iâd like to discuss if this has any practical application.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/ăXă§ăăăăšăXă§ăȘăăă䞥ç«ăă using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. Iâm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.