• Newsgroups: comp.ai.fuzzy
• From: S. F. Thomas <sf.thomas@verizon.net>
• Subject: Re: Thomas' Fuzziness and Probability
• Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 10:41:43 -0400
• Organization: Decan Corp

Stephan Lehmke wrote:
> 
> In article <3B6846DD.D7937B99@verizon.net>, S. F. Thomas writes:
>> Stephan Lehmke wrote:
>>>
>>> So, if it is sensible to say that an orange is `strictly more red'
>>> than a lemon, then the membership degree of the orange in the fuzzy
>>> set of red objects can't be zero.
>>
>> I don't see why not.
> 
> Well if its membership degree is zero, then it's obviously not
> strictly higher than the membership degree of a lemon, making this
> comparison meaningless.

What I fear is that your comparison is dragging a different concept
of color into the discussion. The color spectrum is ordered: red,
orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet is the usual rendition of
the (presumed) infinity of shades of color making up the color
spectrum. From the standpoint of this ordering, one could say that
the band of the spectrum known as "orange" is "strictly more red"
than "yellow", say, or "green". That though is not the same as saying
that "orange" is "red", even to a degree, as a matter of usage. In
any case, it is an empirical question. If you want to establish usage
for a particular shade of color, conduct a calibrational poll, and
see what answer you get. I do not see, a priori, why any given shade
unanimously affirmed to be "orange", could also not, unanimously, be
disaffirmed as "red", even as it would be affirmed, in some,
different, sense, that that shade of "orange" is "more red" -- having
regard to the ordering of the color spectrum, and perhaps also to the
possibility of mixing primary colors to obtain various other shades
of color -- than some other shade affirmed as being "lemon". 

>> In any case, it is an empirical question. Take
>> an
>> exemplar of the shade of orange (the color) you have in mind, and ask
>> N users of the language, whether, yes or no, the use of the term
>> "red"
>> to describe that shade of orange in question is meaningful within the
>> language
>> convention. The fraction concurring is the answer you seek.
> 
> As nobody in full control of their mind and vision would use the term
> "red" to describe an orange color, this fraction is certain to be
> zero. That's exactly what I'm criticising.
> 
> [some cuts without disagreement]
> 
> regards
> Stephan

Regards,
S. F. Thomas