From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Mon May 29 00:58:50 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3133 ; Mon, 29 May 95 00:58:45 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Sat, 27 May 95 07:11:36 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa12687; 27 May 95 8:11 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3948; Sat, 27 May 95 03:09:09 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5339; Sat, 27 May 1995 03:09:09 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 May 1995 03:10:18 -0400 Reply-To: "Dylan P. Thurston" Sender: Lojban list From: "Dylan P. Thurston" Subject: A Fuzzy Ship from Theseus X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander In-Reply-To: <01HQYMEBM4V6BIJDLR@NETOP6.HARVARD.EDU> Message-ID: <9505270811.aa12687@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R la and. cusku di'e > >I suspected that, but was unsure. If truth is gradient, then is false > >a truth value of 0, and true a value of more than 0? > >I wonder whether {lo jei carmi gusni} is different from {lo ni carmi gusni}. As I understand it, absolutely false has a truth value of 0 and absolutely true has a truth value of 1; a statment like la'edi'e cu fatci has its own truth value (which would be just the truth value of the statement referred to). > >Perhaps there is an upper limit on {lo jei c g} (e.g. a value of 1), > >but no upper limit on {lo ni carmi gusni} (allowing for infinite brightness). > >What do you reckon? I'm suspicious of making {lo jei broda} a number at all. People don't tend to quantify things precisely, so assigning a number makes me wary. And there's a lot more going on in natlang semantics; for instance, the truth of a statement is usually relative to some context. Quite possibly the set of contexts that makes a statement true is enough to determine the "fuzziness". But I've thought very little about all this. I just don't thing _this_ is where fuzzy logic should appear. la stiv,n. cusku di'e > ... > Consider the (frequently cited) example of birds. Here is my (arbitrary) > list of things from most birdlike to least: > > Eagle, Pigeon, Penguin, Ostrich, Bat, Flying Squirrel, Jack Rabbit. > > Your ordering would probably be different, of course. Umm.. Yes. Why is a pigeon less of a bird than an eagle? > ... > In Rober Nozick's book, Philosophical Explanations, he describes the old > puzzle of the ship of Theseus. The ship starts out from the port of Theseus > on a lengthy voyage. During the voyage, the entire structure of the ship is > replaced, one plank at a time. When the ship returns to its home port, is > it the same ship? I'd quibble and say yes; I'm the same person I was 5 years ago, even though all the atoms in my body may have changed since then.[1] It's the form, not the materials, that determines identity. But this example could easily be changed to one that I wouldn't quibble with. (e.g., gradually change the shape until it becomes a house.) [1] Not entirely true, but the extent to which it's not true is mainly determined by my experiences since then, not the change in materials. > ... > If there is no clear meaning for ni, perhaps implementing a rich syntax for > describing fuzzy sets with ni would be amusing and/or useful. Perhaps the > capability exists but is simply unrecognized. > > Da is in the 3rd of 7 overlapping fuzzy sets along the Thesean scale. > Da lo ni ci paze botcu ra'i lo Teseus This syntax is definitely out: {cipaze} is 317. "3rd of the seven brodas" is {cimoi le ze broda}, but I'm not sure how that fits in here. > Steven M. Belknap, M.D. > Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine > University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria Wow. For a doctor, you sure sound like a mathematician. mu'o mi'e. dilyn.