http://www.erols.com/igoddard/fuzzy.htm
While the physical facts are always
100% true, our statements about them
may be true, more or less. Fuzzy logic
measures the degree of "more or less."
For example:
THE STATEMENT "the glass is full" about
a glass of water that is 70% full can be
thought of as a set, S, with ten members:
S = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}
where each member is a 10% portion of the
glass's volume that is filled with water.
THE GLASS, which in reality is only 70%
filled with water, is the set, G, such that:
G = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7}
where, like S, each member is a 10% portion of
the glass's volume that is filled with water.
The intersection of S and G = G, therefore
seven members of S correspond to the truth,
to the physical reality. ERGO: S has a truth
value of 70%, or: t(S) = .7 where 100% = 1.
Aristotle claims: t(S) = 0
which is an inferior conclusion where we want
our conclusions to maximize the standard of
a one-to-one correspondence between statement
X and physical fact. IF truth = physical fact,
THEN a fuzzy-truth-value standard maximizes the
truthfulness, or accuracy, of logical mapping.
I believe that Aristotle's outcome above is
0% true because G is a subset of S by 100%.
And now for some random noise:
Resistance to fuzzy is futile. All nonfuzzy memetic
codes will crumble. Surrender to fuzzy or, like bad stuff...
There may be a correlation between bivalent memetic codes
and social aggression, expressed perhaps most clearly in
the "us" versus "them" conflict, either 100% friend or
100% enemy, 100% good or 100% evil... ergo: aggression.
Maximal fuzzy memetic insertion may maximize social peace.
http://www.erols.com/igoddard/fuzzy.htm
*******************************************************************
Visit Ian Williams Goddard ------> http://www.erols.com/igoddard
___________________________________________________________________