FK> RC> Objection! Contrast is by
definition a comparison. Ordinarily, it means comparison with neighboring
pixels, against frequency buckets, comparison against memory settings, all
forms of identity (IMHO) resulting from a comparison function's unique
positioning of that identity within a domain of all such identities.
This is why now it
was high time to see that no ontology is correct without mental operations
identified within the FO language system, of which abstraction is one
operation that results in a property.
Whoah – why does
ABSTRACTION result in a “property” of the thing so abstracted,
instead of in another abstraction slightly more smudged than the first
abstraction from the original? Why not choose a property only after at
least three repeats of the same absractions, or best two out of three double
abstractions? Please justify this construction. But it sounds
done on two objects which may be either a hit or a match output with
respect to each other.
Set ordering aficionados
out there would also like to have at the very least a LessThan and a
GreaterThan result from comparisons, but the more expressive constants
(JustNotEqual, PlausiblyEqual, FuzzilyLike, CouldPossiblyBe, …) would
also be useful to some researchers. The point is that the COMPARISON
function you choose impacts whether you enable a single ordering, multikey
ordering, the choice of ascending or descending ordering, and other
considerations that are of prime interest in very many practical
If they are a
hit, then they have a property in common in terms of form, and they are a
match, if their content is also common.
Just the few comparison
result constants used here - LessThan, Equal, GreaterThan, NotLessThan,
NotEqual, NotGreatThan - and their logical combinations – JustNoMore -
exhaust my vocabulary but shades of preferences based on multiple
property-value comparisons can lead to arbitrarily subtle distinctions.
For every dimension, for every pair of dimensions, and probably for every
triple of dimensions, there are pluralities of comparison functions that establish
unique, monotonic gradients on objects based on the objects’ immutable
But this is a cause for
ordering. If they match, they are equal, but if they don’t, is one
“>” or “<” the other? Property value pairs
for the same property may (OR MAY NOT) be ordered in some rational way.
Any rational ordering implies that there is a comparison function which
calculates the basis property value pair for each of the two Things.
FK> The operation caled abstraction is a folding operation which enables you to see the same thing
or object as an association on the level of two
existences, namely specific and abstract, and you can switch between
the two aspects, as you can transfer across the existing connections as you
like. <snip/> Folding
means that we transfer something or some person in focus from one place to
another. It also means the change itself, when or where something is moved from
one person or place to another, that is the operation that happens when
something is transferred. We do not know what is happening in reality in our
brains, therefore we call for an analogy, as a usual device in any similar
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com