SUO: Re: Physical and Abstract
Phil,
Yes, that is true:
> One problem with this criterion is that it ties understanding an abstraction
> to being able to make replicas of things. However, depending on one's
> technology, one may not be able to reproduce some things that one can
> describe. In that case, the chief purpose of an abstraction is to allow
> people to recognize other instances of the abstraction, and communicate
> about instances of abstractions, so that people can better interact with the
> already existing instances of abstractions.
There is always a problem with primitives:
You can't define them in terms of anything else
in the theory because they are primitives.
Therefore, the basic starting distinctions in any
theory cannot be defined formally. However, it is
possible to give examples or explications that
tell someone who is applying the theory how to
recognize instances of those distinctions.
Those criteria use many nonprimitive terms,
but they show how distinctions can be explained
to students and prospective knowledge engineers.
John