Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!decvax!ucbvax!quintus.UUCP!ok
From: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
Subject: Re: I'm still not convinced ... Fuzzy Logic and Probability Theory
Message-ID: <678@cresswell.quintus.UUCP>
Date: 22 Feb 88 05:25:05 GMT
References: <8802210846.AA02221@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 14
Approved: ailist@kl.sri.com


I don't like "fuzzy logic".  The basic reason for that is very simple:
it puts the fuzziness in the wrong place.  The standard example is
	"John is very tall"
where "very" is interpreted as a degree-of-belief in the proposition
	"John is tall".
This fails to make it clear whether
	- there is some doubt about the height
or	- someone is tall, but there is some doubt about whether it's John.
This ambiguity does not exist in the original statement.  Putting the
fuzziness on the truth-values instead of the functions seems wrong.

In probability, there is a clear distinction between distributions
(relating to functions) and probabilities (relating to propositions).