Xref: utzoo comp.ai:3190 talk.philosophy.misc:1886 sci.lang:4018 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!ihlpb!arm From: arm@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Macalalad) Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.philosophy.misc,sci.lang Subject: Re: Categorization Message-ID: <9464@ihlpb.ATT.COM> Date: 24 Jan 89 19:38:02 GMT References: <681@cogsci.ucsd.EDU> <2959@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> <2899@xyzzy.UUCP> <9450@ihlpb.ATT.COM> Reply-To: arm@ihlpb.UUCP (55528-Macalalad,A.R.) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois Lines: 40 I wrote (among other things) (paraphrased) >The distinction between graded and all-or-none categories is that >graded categories are dependent on context, whereas all-or-none >categories are not. [various arguments that all-or-none categories >are also dependent on context follow] Stevan Harnad replies (among other things) (paraphrased) >Oh no, that is not the distinction at all. Of course all-or-none >categories are dependent on context. Please forgive me if that was not a sufficiently correct or complete paraphrase, but I didn't want to repost pages and pages of commentary. I'm rather confused now about what the distinction between a graded and an all-or-none category. What does it mean to call "big" a graded category? Does it mean that sometimes I categorize something as big and sometimes as small, depending on the situation? Apparently not, from the above. Does it mean that I categorize something as 65% big and 35% small? Does it mean that 65% of the people categorize something as big, and 35% categorize the same thing as small? As a side note, I am not sure whether to classify Harnad's comments about my misreading of Wittgenstein as a compliment or an insult. Compliment: That I write as if I had a working knowledge of such philosophical tomes as Wittgenstein's. Insult: That I misread Wittgenstein. Compliment: That I anticipated (in the sense of coming up with independently) ideas like Wittgenstein's. Insult: That I anticipated a misreading of Wittgenstein. I wonder what the consequences of MIScategorization would be. (:-)