Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Similarity: conformity of one or more - but not all - properties of two or more objects.

_____________
Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
V 33
Perception/Similarity/Quine: transition from perception to perception similarity (perc.sim.) makes perception itself disappear - ontological clarity - similarity: three digit: Episode a resembles b more than c - perception similarity: in contrast, bundle of dispositions of 2nd order (to respond).
---
V 35
Similarity/Quine: bundle of behavioral dispositions of 2nd order - relative: e.g. red ball, yellow rose - red rose, red scarf: depends on reward whether ball and rose are similar - perception similarity: if four-digit relation, then "viewpoint" superfluous - learning: here, there must be different degrees of similarity! - Otherwise any enhanced relation would equally be conditioned on every future episode, because they would all be equally similar - from that follows that perception similarity standards are innate.
---
V 37
Classes: do not explain similarity: an object does not have any more class memberships in common with another one than with any third one.
---
V 39
Similarity/Quine: Episodes: three types of similarity: 1) reception similarity: has to do only with input variables - 2) behavioral similarity: ultimately definable by total quantity of fibers. - 3) perception similarity: somehow in the middle between 1st and 2nd inner state: may be determined by previous stimuli, but not by the present ones! - Reason: perceptual similarity standards are subject to change (through more reward).
- - -
VII 12ff
Meaning/Quine: problems: a) "having a meaning", b) equality of meaning: we can explore the latter via behavior, without having to adopt meaning as an entity.
---
IX 57
Definition "less than"/Quine: y.
---
Lauener XI 108f
Similarity/Logic/Set Theory/Classes/Quine/Lauener: similarity has a dubious logic status: sets do not help in explaining:
---
Lauener XI 109
Things can be freely combined to sets - any two things are common elements of the same number of classes as any other two things - therefore it is not possible to reflect "a is more similar to b than to c" by "a and b together belong to more sets than a and c".


_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.

Q I
W.V.O. Quine
Wort und Gegenstand Stuttgart 1980

Q II
W.V.O. Quine
Theorien und Dinge Frankfurt 1985

Q III
W.V.O. Quine
Grundzüge der Logik Frankfurt 1978

Q IX
W.V.O. Quine
Mengenlehre und ihre Logik Wiesbaden 1967

Q V
W.V.O. Quine
Die Wurzeln der Referenz Frankfurt 1989

Q VI
W.V.O. Quine
Unterwegs zur Wahrheit Paderborn 1995

Q VII
W.V.O. Quine
From a logical point of view Cambridge, Mass. 1953

Q VIII
W.V.O. Quine
Bezeichnung und Referenz
In
Zur Philosophie der idealen Sprache, J. Sinnreich (Hg), München 1982

Q X
W.V.O. Quine
Philosophie der Logik Bamberg 2005

Q XII
W.V.O. Quine
Ontologische Relativität Frankfurt 2003

Q XI
H. Lauener
Willard Van Orman Quine München 1982


> Counter arguments against Quine
> Counter arguments in relation to Similarity



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-07-21