> >The subjective influence of such "line drawing" can be reduced with
> >Fuzzy Logic. We can say
> >with 0.5 percent certainty that such-and-such a critter is a bird.
>
> You can SAY it, but that doesn't make the category "bird" any less
> arbitrary. It doesn't make "bird" a natural kind, i.e. a category that
> exists independent of the interests of the taxonomist. You can say with
> 100% certainty that such and such a critter is a bird. Reduction with
> Fuzzy Logic doesn't make the category "bird" any more substantial than
> the category "weirdo."
> You can't wave a magic wand and clear away some subjective haze which
> distorts our ability to determine which interest-independent category
> into which a thing should fit. There are no such categories to be
> obscured.
1] I'm not presenting Fuzzy Logic as a magic wand, only my cock serves that
function.
2] Fuzzy Logic does not and can not define catagories. But, given a
framework of catagories,
Fuzzy Logic provides tools for putting things into these catagories. This
tool works a little
better that classic Logic.
Fuzzy Logic has come up quite a few times in the past few days. For those
interested, here's a
Fuzzy Logic FAQ:
http://starlab.ifmo.ru:8000/service/topics/ai/faqs/fuzzlog.htm
-- David Leeper Homo Deus http://home1.gte.net/dleeper/index.htm