
Re: Sets as Memory traces.
Posted:
Feb 8, 2013 5:14 PM


On Feb 9, 8:12 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 6, 9:14 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Suppose that we have three bricks, A,B,C, now one can understand the > > Whole of those bricks to be an object that have every part of it > > overlapping with brick A or B or C, lets denote that whole by W. Of > > course clearly W is not a brick, W is the totality of all the three > > above mentioned bricks. However here I want to capture the idea of > > 'membership' of that whole, more specifically what do we mean when we > > say that brick A is a 'member' of W. We know that A is a part of W, > > but being a part of W is not enough by itself to qualify A as being a > > member of W, one can observe that brick A itself can have many proper > > parts of it and those would be parts of W of course (since parthood > > is transitive) and yet non of those is a member of W. So for a part of > > W to be a member of W there must be some property that it must > > satisfy. > > I think you've stumbled onto a more generic problem of identification > and reference. > > e.g. the sentence "were does that go?" > > makes sense to people because we can see where the speaker is pointing > at. > > an identifying action not part of the sentencial language. > > I plan to incorporate the mouse pointer to cover this effect in > Natural Language processing. > > Herc > www.BLoCKPOINTER.com
www.BLoCKPROLOG.com !!
Herc

