Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
John Bottoms wrote:
JB> My understanding of categories consists
of the following:
(domain == professional discipline or context across
or across a number of contributors)
RC> If this is a continuation of
the Semantic Systems thread (?), then some of the emails we have been seeing
about "Measures" might be relevant to distinguishing individuals from
groups. If we need a Property (Measure), we need to collect specimen
individuals using that Measure before we can categorize the individuals or the
group in any way.
But it still seems necessary to have a "window
function" ("membership predicate?") that will distinguish A from
Not A specimens based on the Value of the measured Property, thus creating the
first Category - A.
Every Category requires a Predicate, so
that must be next.
After that, I concede that Conjunction be
canonized into the ontogeny.
1. Quantification of an environment can be
2. The domain is determined by a boundary and the
quantification process divides the
3. The metric for the effectiveness quantification is
coverage of the domain. However,
this may also
include metrics that include more
components such as means.
My question is related to the effective coverage and
part, derived from the criticism of the DIKW (or any
pyramid) of the abstractions of knowledge.
Q: "Should it be possible to replace the existing
categories with an approach
that extracts measured concepts
from meanings and then
performs cluster analysis on those
RC> Yes. For one example,
a.) One of the weakness of the category concept is
are designed for coverage fo
a domain for which the boundary
may be poorly ascribed or
poorly understood. e.g. we have
seen redefinition of
"I.Q" to include spatial and musical
b.) Next, domain boundaries change across time and new
may need to be added; for
those changes the new entities must
be vetted. This could be done
using cluster analysis.
c.) Finally, the redefinition of the process for
categories could be automated
and because the process relies
on a set of meanings rather
than a set of categories, it is
easier to perform vetting on
RC> John that last point isn't clear to
me at all, but all the preceding sounds like a great start on reviewing
identification and categorization processes.