From: Ben Goertzel (ben@goertzel.org)
Date: Wed Apr 03 2002 - 14:10:17 MST
I think that if a reader is going to be confused by the phonetic and
typographical similarity between the words "qualitative" and "quantitative",
then this reader is unlikely to be able to understand very much of your
writing anyway.
These words have well-recognized meanings and I suggest you continue using
them in the standard way rather than introducing a different terminology.
-- ben g
p.s. obviously using "continuous" to encompass "integer-valued" just isn't
kosher mathematically...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sl4@sysopmind.com [mailto:owner-sl4@sysopmind.com]On Behalf
> Of Michael Roy Ames
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:45 PM
> To: sl4@sysopmind.com
> Subject: Re: Terminology problem
>
>
> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > "Quantitative" fits well, so ideally I'd like to get rid of
> > "qualitative" and replace it with something that more
> > effectively conveys the image of a selection from a bounded
> > set or binary set. Any suggestions?
>
>
> You are right... the words sound so similar, they lead to confusion. My
> 'top of the head' ideas may be non-starters, but they might spark
> some other
> ideas.
>
> "qualitative" vs "quantitative"
> --------------------------------------
> Bounded (Set) Unbounded (Set)
> Digital Analog
> Discrete Continuous
> Finite Infinite
> Countable Uncountable
> Step/Jump Ramp/Smooth
> Close Far
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:38 MDT