Skip to main content

From Ordinary to Mathematical Categorization in the Visual World… of Words, Pictures and Practices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 481 Accesses

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 348))

Abstract

My initial strategy is to focus on categorization and its indeterminacy, since they play a role in understanding and using pictures as well as they do in symbolic representation and reasoning. The methodological choice to emphasize categorization is not arbitrary; it is rather motivated by the central role it plays in conceptual and formal accounts of the phenomenon of vagueness as well as in the very practice of its investigation, particularly in philosophical models of linguistic vagueness and the application of formal models of fuzzy sets. I take it to be a stable description of a phenomenon and a practice itself used to guide and explain other forms of behavior. There is some gain in trying to apply the conceptual standards developed around the linguistic cases: it brings out the scope of their relevance and some of their differences in role and interpretation. But, again, this is not to deny the variety of additional or alternative criteria relevant for understanding or establishing representation, or the mechanisms for effecting it; similarly, in the specific case of categorization, for its possible criteria or procedures. The caveat, I repeat, is that, like representation, the role of categorization itself as a label for a cognitive practice and an explanation for cognitive and other practices may very well be reinterpreted, explained away and replaced; that is, in objectivist terms, talk of categorization could be “wrong” and in pragmatic, functional terms, it could prove less efficient than alternatives. Vagueness and fuzzy set theory will have to be reinterpreted accordingly. Either way, applying specific views to new models of specific cognitive phenomena will suggest further developments that I leave the reader to explore.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Cat [1].

  2. 2.

    For a comprehensive discussion of varieties of approaches to conceptualization and attempts at a common framework, see, for instance, Machéry [2].

  3. 3.

    A note on language: as a result of my focus on a generalized empirical notion of categorization that includes properties as well as activities, I often speak of categorizations where the reader might expect a reference to categories or even predicates.

  4. 4.

    Goodman [3], Elgin [4].

  5. 5.

    I call the strategy, methodological nominalism; as a form of methodological minimalism, it ensures the methodological generality that performs the connecting function my argument requires across a number of conceptual divides.

  6. 6.

    We can always rule out vagueness by definition, for instance, by adopting standards of rigid designation, in Kripke’s sense, relating naming and necessity within a possible-world semantics.

  7. 7.

    One example of a complex approach is the community-based, multi-component vector model of reference in Putnam [5].

  8. 8.

    The overlap includes the existence of ideographic alphabets.

  9. 9.

    Goodman [3].

  10. 10.

    Given the relation between content and categorization, one may read IC-EC rules equivalently, as linking intrinsic and extrinsic categorizations.

  11. 11.

    In relation to the role of perception in image design, see Ware [6]; see also Gong et al. [7].

  12. 12.

    On the independence of perceptual recognition from belief see Schier [8] and Lopes [9]. Human perception, like machines, might run on a recognition process that follows something like a rule-based iterative algorithm, but if it does, the human algorithm is opaque (Zadeh’s terminology). The IC–EC rule is here a matter of mechanism exercising the capacity that enables the formation of extrinsic categorization stimulated by intrinsic categorization. The transparent machine algorithm models the categorization outcome and along the way postulates a procedure that models also the process.

  13. 13.

    Schier [8], Walton [10], Lopes [9].

  14. 14.

    On this debate see Walton [10], Currie [11], Kulvicki [12].

  15. 15.

    For a discussion of the complexity of this formal practice of set-theoretic representation, see Cat [13].

  16. 16.

    Zadeh [14].

  17. 17.

    This is a straight application of Zadeh’s formal extension principle and subsequent generalizations; they are rules for generalizing domains of set-theoretic structures and reasoning based on the notion a variable having precise value must be replaced with that of a variable having a degree of membership to each possible value; Dubois and Prade [15], 36–38. Zadeh’s original formulation is based on a definition of Cartesian product for fuzzy subsets of different classic universes; see Zadeh [16].

  18. 18.

    For a discussion of the role of fuzzy concepts in scientific models see Cat [17].

  19. 19.

    Other things being equal, standards include calibration and replication.

  20. 20.

    Cat [13].

  21. 21.

    See, for instance, Smith [18].

References

  1. Cat, J. (2016). The performative construction of natural kinds: Mathematical application as practice. In C. Kendig (Ed.), Natural kinds and classification in scientific practice (pp. 87–105). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Machéry, E. (2009). Doing without concepts. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Goodman, N. (1976). Languages of art. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Elgin, C. Z. (1997). Between the absolute and the arbitrary. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Putnam, H. (1978). Realism and reason. In Meaning and the moral sciences (pp. 125–126). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ware, C. (2008). Visual thinking for design. New York: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gong, S., McKenna, S. J., & Psarrou, A. (2000). Dynamic vision. London: Imperial College Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Schier, F. (1986). Deeper into pictures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Lopes, D. (1996). Understanding pictures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Walton, K. (1990). Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Currie, G. (1995). Image and mind: Film, philosophy and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Kulvicki, J. (2014). Images. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cat, J. (2015). An informal meditation on empiricism and approximation in fuzzy logic and fuzzy set theory: Between subjectivity and normativity. In R. Seising, E. Trillas, & J. Kacprzyk (Eds.), Fuzzy logic: Towards the future (pp. 179–234). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 201, 240–256.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Dubois, D., & Prade, H. (1980). Fuzzy sets and systems. Theory and applications. New York: Academic Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Zadeh, L. A. (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning. Information Science 8, 199–249, 301–357; 9, 43–80.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cat, J. (2006). On fuzzy empiricism and fuzzy-set models of causality: What is all the fuzz about? Philosophy of Science, 73(1), 26–41.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Smith, N. J. J. (2010). Vagueness and degrees of truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jordi Cat .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cat, J. (2017). From Ordinary to Mathematical Categorization in the Visual World… of Words, Pictures and Practices. In: Fuzzy Pictures as Philosophical Problem and Scientific Practice. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 348. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47190-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47190-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47189-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47190-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics