Talk:Generalization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Moved from article:
The term "generalization" has a meaning in logic; where does the above come from? --LMS
- This comes from mathematics. Reading the article for definition, I guess this perhaps should really be called genus. What is the meaning of the term "generalization" in logic? --Seb
- All generalizations are false ;) --Magnus Manske
-
- There's not enough context for this article. Mintguy 21:50 19 May 2003 (UTC)
I just wanted to ask if there should be some mention of 'strict' and 'normal' generalisations in the very self-same way that people include such distinctions in regards to subsets, etc.. (ie: whether or not A is a subset or superset of B). This may seem facetious (I do maths - sorry) but I think it's important - should A be allowed to be a generalisation of itself? I know in everyday usage this is not (usually?) the case - but I think the devil's in the detail, so best to make the distinction clear.
Contents |
[edit] Re the "Confusing" note
We should always bear in mind that we are writing an encyclopaedia here and what we are writing should be clear for the uninitiated who will not know what the first section of this article is all about. You are not addressing your peers here necessarily, but people who will probably not have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Please bear this in mind, at least please make it clear which branch of science you are referring to - logic, mathematics, linguistics?. Dieter Simon 00:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC) Dieter Simon 01:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] intro para ;; promote change to disambiguation or see also ;; note similarity to generic
2006-10-16 Added intro paragraph to help with the confusion indication.
This article, when developed further, will almost certainly call for disambiguation. It is recommended that the intro paragraph give a basic, layman-friendly introduction, with perhaps a short paragraph giving an example, and the remainder of the article pointing to already-existing and yet-to-be-created articles in mathematics, logic, rhetoric, linguistics, and whatever other specific contexts.
Generalization is a fundamental component of human reasoning and cognition. It is difficult to see how this article could develop as an independent entity and still remain accessible and clear. drefty.mac 21:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Aim of the Article?
Because generalizations form part of informal logic often used in speeches and debates. My question is: Why is cartographic generalization of geo-spatial data part of this article? Surely, language and geography are to unrelated topics, therefore you can rather link out the cartographic generalizations while sticking purely to the language aspect of the subject?
In addition I find the explanation of a generalization in this article rather complex. For me a generalization is:
SAMPLE A HAS CHARACTERISTIC X THEREFORE POPULATION OF A's HAS CHARACTERISTIC X
e.g The blonds in my school are stupid, therefore all blonds are stupid
After this you could go into a discussion about sample representativity and sufficiency that make a generalization valid.
I debated along time ago, so it would take some time before I will be able to find my sources again.
Just my two cents.. I am new here so i don't exactly know how things work around here. Weszup 07:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Editing the page to be more helpful
It appears to me everyone has abandoned Generalizations. So if you guys don't mind. I will try and edit the page so that it focuses more on the argumentative aspect generalizations. This is where it is most often used. The math aspect to me is rather vague. This whole article is rather vague. Weszup 18:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
