Computer machine language requires a 1 or a 0 to be dropped into a bucket and programming languages are translations of orders about what to drop in which bucket. But if we cannot assign a numerical quantity to such terms in a series such as good/better/best, we cannot use it in a programme.
Well, I would never argue that the two were one and the same, but only that they have a shared core. In both cases we are dealing with a spectrum. From glancing at at, it seems that fuzzy logic gives spectrum values to propositions, rather than binary values.. And this is obviously a move in the math direction. Words can never be calculated as numbers can. I propose that number is a subset of word, as strictly and systematically quantized magnitude and symbols of relation.
Yes, it's quite true. We would have to turn good-better-best into numbers.
I'm trying to point at the shared core though. The unity element. Objects are singular. If we name a plurality of objects, still this plurality is singular, just as the word plurality is singular. Considered as a plurality, they are being considered as a sum. if we speak of all cats, we speak of a sum. if we speak of our pet cat fluffy, we speak of a sum, the sum of our experiences of "fluffy." the Being of beings is perhaps unity.
---------- Post added 04-19-2010 at 04:47 PM ----------
And isn't it the case that the series is a model but the values can change according to the subject to which it is applied, can change by who applies them, and can be discarded for a more detailed series is appropriate (think of compass directions for example;NSEW is fine for some things, NNW for others)?
I'm thinking of the sigma sign in math. Sum 2n (for n = natural numbers 1 to 10). It looks better when written in math scribble. 3 to the power of 3 is just an abbreviated way to order a multiplication, and multiplication is just addition abbreviated, etc. And position notation is just unary abbreviated. Of course all this depends on an established system of notation. Still, it surpasses our much more complex Word use in its clarity.
I agree that various level of precision are desired according to the situation. We are still on a one-dimensional spectrum though, which allows us two directions. I like that you mention NESW. Polar coordinates are great. And the compass and the clock are polar. Angle and radius.
It may be a failure on my part to express myself, but I do feel that you don't see what I'm driving at. It's a strange thought (my idea), and perhaps in no way useful.