There are some things I like about it, and I wondered whether others would agree. (Rule 2) However, it is my opinion that those with the alternative view are unhelpful to Wikipedia; such people destroy value just to play some game with themselves (possibly because they are unable to help in creating real value in the first place). Any opinions? = Thus we have stated what virtue is in respect of its genus. In further defense of the importance of the section on multiplicity, I secondly note that it directly leads to thinking about the structure of not only a set of definitions, but also the structure of a single definition, and how is‑a and has‑a relationships can be mapped to genera and differentiae (and, at least to some large degree, vice versa). Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. 105-109. Well, that portion pertaining to service to the gods, of course! A genus–differentia definition is a type of intensional definition, and it is composed of two parts: 1. Two steps are required to define a term by genus and difference. I don't mean to kick Mfwitten while he's down, and I know that he's the reason we've lost the old intro and the table presentation of definitions, but it seems to me that these losses were a mistake. Therefore, the discussion belongs here. If the genus is identical to the differentia then the differentia must articulate everything the genus implies indeterminately. Search. You are arguing against a statement that is not there, and thus ALL of your examples are wasted. ? Articles can survive as long as the are uncontested. Information should be destroyed when it is, We require "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a, We require that all articles rely primarily on, We require multiple sources so that we can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with, Because these requirements are based on major content policies, they apply to all articles, not solely articles justified under the, The spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule. Phiwum (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC). (Be sure also to look at my questions regarding WP:OR at the bottom of this talk page, please.) If this is so then a subsection, that would certainly enhance the article by presenting a neutral point of view, would be warranted. That might be true to some, but in reality may only be on a particular point or subject, thus one may still be learned and lack certain knowledge. what this Wikipedia article used initially. The superior fiber properties of Gossypium barbadense L. serve as a source of novel variation for improving fiber quality in…, A close relationship between K3 surfaces and the Mathieu groups has been established in the last century. It's not a particularly essential bit in any case. * a genus (or family): An existing definition…. Basically, the language for your definition of "piety": is meant to be interpreted in the context of an extensional definition of "justice" rather than an intensional definition by genus and differentia; the term "justice" is very silently assumed to be written something like this: Here, the term "justice" is being defined by listing all members of the genus "justice", and thus the words "that part of justice" actually mean "a member of the genus justice" (or, as I've been using in other comments, "a manifestation of justice"), which can simply be reduced to "justice" and employed as the genus of a definition of "piety" by genus and differentia: Perhaps an expanded system of definitions by genus and differentia might look like the following: Mfwitten (talk) 23:46, 17 December 2011 (UTC). Mfwitten (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC), These policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. The text I wrote for the article states that the differentia of a definition (namely, the non‑genus portion of the differentia of a definition) is simply a place where a has‑a relationship may be specified. We should probably also refer to Aristotle's treatment of such definitions. I would also like to state that I will have no qualms bringing. In this sense, the citation would corroborate not the reliability of what has been written on Wikipedia, but rather just my own determination to get the information on Wikipedia. As for understanding, or not understanding, the fault could lie on the person but could just as easily lie in the presentation of what is presented that is attempting to be understood. It is highly probable that no one person (specifically speaking of the species Homo sapiens) knows everything. Beyond being a tool of science, logic is also a specific discipline in Islamic studies that reflects scholars’ metaphysical and ontological assumptions. Mfwitten (talk) 03:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC). Includes a claim that "Definition by genus and difference is the most effective of the intensional definitions for producing the five kinds of definition discussed in Section 2.3." I have read that there are limits of defining certain things by genus and difference. The differentia (rules and superiority) or (superior and rules) are free for multiple uses: 'a ruling class', 'rules superiority', or 'transcends its sect' so as to avoid circularity. I still feel that the term "method" is not inappropriate as there is no doubt that the title (and article) reflects only one of several known "methods" of defining. So knowledge and animals have different differentia. Genus belongs to a ranking lower than family and above species, whereas species are organisms with similar characteristics that come below the Genus classification ranking. How to use differentia in a sentence. I found multiple references to this name and only one that corresponds with the current title. A definition consists of a genus and a species. They can then still survive if some argument is presented to justify existence that gains consensus and sometimes even with a lack of references. Of course, I don't mind if information about such history is introduced, but I think it's important to recognize that there are two approaches to this subject at play (I am concerned primarily with the latter): Regarding notability: I personally feel that in general, the concept of "notability" is mostly a ridiculous one. 1 Mfwitten (talk) 23:46, 17 December 2011 (UTC). Which definition is correct? The abstraction made is "chess, except that the order in which the order of play remains unspecified", followed by differentiation by specifying an order of play that is different to that of chess. However, this almost always does not make sense: That rule only makes sense when resources are limited, such as when an article has become very lengthy, and it becomes worthwhile to reorganize or streamline it, etc. So, your example is really a specification for how to abstract away a portion of the definition of "justice" (but not explicitly what that abstraction really is), and the term "piety" is simply the name given to that abstraction, and (as already shown) the genus of "piety" is: That is, "piety" is "[a] service to the gods", which certainly agrees with my understanding of "piety". It's a reference to a portion of an existing definition, namely the definition of "justice". I can pass this by the community to see if a particular example is justification (or not) or choose another avenue of dispute resolution. "Jacobian matrix" and Hessian matrix mention partial derivatives but "Jacobian matrix" states, "... is the matrix of all first-order partial derivatives of a vector- or scalar-valued function...", while "Hessian matrix" states, "...is the square matrix of second-order partial derivatives. Is a square a manifestation of a rectangle or is it a manifestation of a a rhombus? I assume that since words can be subjected to this method then certainly sentences and even paragraphs can. Your thoughts are incomplete. The common purpose of building a free encyclopedia trumps both. Put another way: That rule is only valuable because of our current limitations as humans, and I certainly don't think it can be said to apply in thise case. 1 2 Secondly, I address the accusations of WP:OR. Otr500 (talk) 08:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC). * a genus (or family): An existing definition that serves as a portion of the new definition; all definitions with the same genus are considered members of that genus. First, a genus must be named—the genus of which the species designated by the definiendum is the subclass. This is where Slattery saw that a univocal theory of the genus would interfere with his understanding. it hints at the thoughtful use of definite and indefinite articles used throughout the development of the concept of definition by genus and differentia (and it is also an allusion to those human languages in which it is permissible to use the definite article before somebody's name); the definition itself also follows the explicit 'a with ' pattern that has been frequently used. You are currently offline. A history section is very important to the article and inclusion for some connection to Aristotelianism other than one reference. Copi and Cohen's "Introduction to Logic", Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. Species Verb Genus Differentia A rifle is a dangerous object that shoots bullets. I think that this book may be more relevant for us, since it seems to deal more explicitly with differentia. Unless a reference can be given, I suggest it should be removed. This process of producing new definitions by extending existing definitions is commonly known as differentiation (and also as derivation). has come under attack for 2 reasons so far: Mfwitten (talk) 20:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC), You didn't actually answer my question: is there any good reason to prefer the example as it stands, despite the repeated need to defend yourself? Let me put this into a different light: Much of the text that you just destroyed is merely a recording of deductive logic and intellectual musings, the merit of which any reader is capable of considering on his own without any help from a blessed authority; requiring the citation of some authority imposes an extreme limitation on the free‑flow of this kind of information. An Introduction, Definition in Jurisprudence (The Philosophical Quarterly), Standardization of Technical Terminology: Principles and Practices - STP 806, Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine, Substance and essence in Aristotle: an interpretation of Metaphysics VII-IX, John Philoponus' New Definition of Prime Matter. If more than the logical connotation is stated, it becomes over complete definition. At this point it apparently has escaped notice. Phiwum (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2011 (UTC). In short, your point of contention does not exist; only your own confusion exists. I feel that my lack of any foundational understanding concerning a subject may be a reason not to try to get into a philosophical discussion on said subject but this does not mean that I can not see errors, things presented as to be confusing, or certain important things omitted. Aristotle offers a dilemma. A much more recent descendant of the above. Mfwitten (talk) 02:25, 21 November 2011 (UTC), I am listing comments on the project page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philosophy. 1 A distinguishing mark or characteristic. We might consider the objects of a category to be a "genus", and then single out certain types of these objects through differentia. …more complex concept into the genus and differentia—the broader and narrowing concepts—typical of standard definitions: the symbols for the genus and differentia of a concept were operations on terms, extracting the genus or differentia of a concept. Should we disregard Principia Mathematica because you, as a particular reader, can't fathom why it would take around 400 pages of foundational logic to prove Genus and Differentia: Reconciling Unity in Definition, The collected writings of James Henley Thornwell, Volume 4, The principles of empirical or inductive logic, Understanding Educational Research. Fortunately, the article, as it was written, can help you understand. The only thing going for the detractors of what I have written is the lack of citations. "The world changes, and Wikipedia must change with it. It becomes nothing but a statement of the intent to punish people for … Listed in the section "Jacobian matrix" of "Jacobian matrix and determinant": Perhaps we could consider my "ignorance" or lack of "mature enough foundation" as to the reasons I feel there is confusion in discussing "second derivative" on one hand and "second-order" on the other as well as "first derivatives" as opposed to "first-order". Your destructive edit is no doubt an unintended consequence of the "policy" you cite. ; For example, consider these two definitions: Regarding references: I personally feel that references are only useful for resolving disputes. If a sequence has 3 nodes, then that sequence has a SequenceNode that has a SequenceNode that has a SequenceNode. I don't think it's wrong to synthesize or even to produce original research on Wikipedia, because to me, the free‑flow of ideas and information is what is important—not whether some bloke said the same thing in some other medium. Since "ignorance", which can be defined by genus and differentia, is only a lack of knowledge, I imagine all are ignorant to some point. A genus–differentia definition is a type of intensional definition, and it is composed of two parts: 1. Definition by abstraction then speciation? To that, I think the very first footnote of WP:OR is instructive: Citations are not necessary if there is a reasonable expectation that every bit of material is supported by a published, reliable source. Discussing accidents of our particular Universe, like Boethius. A non‑genus portion of the differentia of "justice". © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc. 0 Didlogos, 66 0995) pp. Includes a discussion of "human" as "rational animal" and makes the point that, from a logical viewpoint, we could just as well take "rational" as the genus and "animal" as the difference. First, the introduction explicitly mentions "species", which is an essential term in traditional presentations of genus-difference, but is currently omitted until the "human being" example (where "species" could well mean the biological classification, not the term usually meant in this context). TERM CLASS DIFFERENTIATION Person is a human being considered as having a character of his or her own; or as being different from all others. For instance, let's assume that this article does perform a synthesis that cannot be attributed to some non‑Wikipedia source. For the record, I am not the one who chose the current title of the article, and I'm currently the, The whole definition (to which one may refer with the term "Mfwitten" or "the Mfitten") is, The genus of Mfwitten (which is "a Wikipedia user") may be called synonymously, The differentia of Mfwitten (which is "with the account name 'Mfwitten'") may be called synonymously. I'll change that presently. 31-42. an elaborate explanation for justification, Characterizing the definitions of anatomical concepts in WordNet and specialized sources. But the genus on a univocal theory contains differentiae that are contrary to one another. The measured current values outputted from first and second sensors are held in time series, movement average value are calculated, from the measured current values held in time series the time differentia value is calculated from a pair of the movement average value by least square approximation, and the drug sensitivity is determined from the calculated time differential value, thus achieving accurate drug … Now, I recognize that this stance is diametrically opposed to the stance that some users of Wikipedia have. This article has been around since 2001. A genus may be on a lower or a higher level of abstraction. Regarding a History section: I don't particularly care about the history, personally—I don't particularly care that someone thinks that we would be deprived of this concept (or at least this terminology) unless some guy named Boethius wrote about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Genus–differentia_definition&oldid=575194471, Start-Class philosophy of language articles, Philosophy of language task force articles, Automatically assessed Linguistics articles, Low-importance philosophy of language articles, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This article has not yet received a rating on the project's, An embedded account name appears like vandalism. ), abstraction, and even multiplicity play fundamental roles in understanding the conceptual world and essentially the physical world; I think that making this connection will ignite an explosion of understanding in their heads, and it will perhaps lead others to these related subjects. In light of that, as with entertaining the thought of sections, it might be a good idea to consider the genus–differentia of the evidence presented. ; the differentia: The portion of the definition that is not provided by the genus. In any case, the title Genus–differentia definition seems to be suitable: However, as another alternative, the article Definition has long had the section: Though a bit circuitous, it would be a decent article title: Mfwitten (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC), Is this section WP:OR, or is there a reference to a discussion of this sort? WorldCat Home About WorldCat Help. Regarding confusion: I stand by my original statements. Genus–differentia definition — Part of a series on Aristotelianism … Wikipedia. In particular, the text that I wrote never states that any differentia can be regarded as a has‑a relationship (as you imply it does), but only that it is the differentia of a definition (namely, the non‑genus portion of the differentia) that may be used for expressing a has‑a relationship, which is discussed by the sections on multiplicity and structure (which you destroyed). Using one of your words I feel sections did offer "enhancements". 2)- User name (supposedly fictitious); You have stated that I am indignant and have an aversion over your use of a presented "fictitious" name when the. Two a genus (or family): An existing definition that serves as a portion of the new definition; all definitions with the same genus are considered members of that genus. Example sentences with the word differentia. Indeed, the article is now obviously less complete. It is the difference that is problematic. Concerning the above mentioned article "Jacobian matrix"; there are issues there also. Differentia is a see also of genus. The genus for your definition can be simply "quality", or more precisely, "moral principle". A genus–differentia definition is a type of intensional definition which defines a species (that is, a type — not necessarily a biological category) as a subtype of a genus satisfying certain conditions (the differentia).Thus, the definiendum in such definitions is always a species (and not an individual), while the definiens consists of two parts:. Do you see the richness of this example? Genus: Law Differentia: Although specified at a particular time, applies to a time period before that Comment: A retroactive law nullifies the objectivity of the law, which is the purpose of having laws. For reference, here's the example: Now, I imagine that the term Piety is being defined, so let's place it in a more canonical form: What does "pertaining to" mean? Please note that the text that I wrote makes these two statements: So, most importantly, you are making a straw man argument; you are fighting against a position that I do not actually take. By substituting the definition of a rectangle into the definition of a square, one gets: Just as "piety" in your example is (likely) a genus of "justice" (and certainly not the other way around), so it is that "a rectangle" is a genus of "a square" (and certainly not the other way around); a square is a manifestation of a rectangle; a square is a rectangle. A method of defining terms would be the method used to determine the definition. 101-102. Genius and Tragedy at Dawn of Computer Age. I can show another side of my foundational maturity regarding references should the need arise. A genus–differentia definition is a type of intensional definition, and it is composed of two parts:. As with the treatment of your example: Because we are actually given the definition of a square (unlike with "justice"), we can surmise which part of a square is actually meant by the abstraction specification, thereby allowing for an explicit definition: Just as "service to the gods" in your example is a genus of "piety", so it is that "a quadrilateral with certain interior angles" is a genus of "a rectangle". For reference, here is one of the definitions of a square that is presented: As with your example of "piety", this is a vague specification for an abstraction; the definition of a rectangle given here is specifying that something is being abstracted away from the definition of a square. This, combined with the spirit of acceptable synthesis makes what I have written acceptable, and WP:IGNORE makes what I have written essential. A species is defined by giving its genus and its differentia: the genus is the kind under which the species falls, and the differentia tells what characterizes the species within that genus. You are not improving Wikipedia by destroying content like this.
Fairlands Golf Club,
Stella Di Mare Online Stream,
Jersey Giant Küken,
Baby Schwimmkurs Metzingen,
Red Bull Ring Kurven,
Russische Frauen Handball Nationalmannschaft,
Neue Kommentare