Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

ONT Re: Hermeneutic Equivalence Classes




o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

| Leibniz, "Elements of a Calculus" (cont.)
|
| 13.  If neither term is contained in the other
|      they are called "disparate";  and then, as
|      I have said, they either have something in
|      common or they differ totally.
|
|      Those terms have something in common which are under
|      the same genus, and which you could call "conspecies";
|      as "man" and "brute" have the concept of animal in common.
|      "Gold" and "silver" have in common the concept of metal,
|      "gold" and "vitriol", that of mineral.
|
|      From this it is evident that two terms have more or less in common
|      as their genus is less or more remote.  For if the genus is very
|      remote, there will be little that the species have in common.
|
|      If the genus is most remote, we say that things are "heterogeneous",
|      i.e. that they differ totally, like body and spirit;  not because
|      they have nothing in common -- for they are both substances, at
|      any rate -- but because this common genus is very remote.
|
|      From this it is evident that what is to be called heterogeneous or not is
|      a relative matter.  However, in our calculus it is enough for two things
|      to have no concepts in common out of certain fixed concepts which are
|      designated by us, even though they may have others in common.
|
| Leibniz, 'Logical Papers', p. 21.
|
| Leibniz, G.W., "Elements of a Calculus" (April, 1679),
| G.H.R. Parkinson (ed.), 'Leibniz:  Logical Papers', pp. 17-24,
| Oxford University Press, London, UK, 1966.   (Couturat, 49-57).

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o