This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
KYST is the acronymic title for the Kruskal-Young-Shepard-Torgerson Multidimensional Scaling Program written by Dr. J. B. Kruskal, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Murray Hill, N.J. and Dr. F. W. Young, Psychometric Laboratory, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C. assisted by Judith B. Seery, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ.
This text is designated in Table 1 as AES.
Alastair McKinnon, “A Method of Displaying Differences Between Various Accounts of an Object,”revue CIRPHO review, 2 (1974).
It is this secondary sense which appears in Tables 1 and 2 and Fig. 1.
Consider, for example, the following sentences chosen almost at random fromConcluding Unscientific Postscript (Oxford University Press, 1945): “So it seems that these two, Lessing and the systematist, both talk about a persistent striving; only that Lessing is stupid or honest enough to call it persistent striving, while the systematist is clever or dishonest enough to call it the System” (p. 99). “System and finality are pretty much one and the same, so much so that if the system is not finished, there is no system” (p. 98). “The system ... begins with the immediate ... But before making a beginning with the System, why is it that the second, equally, aye, precisely equally important question has not been raised....How does the System begin with the immediate? That is to say, does it begin with it immediately? The answer to this question must be an unconditional negative. If the System is presumed to come after existence, by which a confusion with an existential system may be occasioned, then the System is of courseex post facto ... The beginning which begins with the immediateis thus itself reached by means of a process of reflection.... (this one thought) is, in all its simplicity, sufficient to decide that no existential system is possible; and that no logicial system may boast an absolute beginning ...” (pp. 101f.). “... for here everything is necessary; and it is lucky for the System that it has to do only with the dead, since it must be intolerable for a living individual to be understood in this manner” (p. 132). “To me it rather seems strange that the System, aye, even systems in the plural, have been completed without raising a question concerning the ethical” (p. 291). “One does not live any more, one does not act, one does not believe; but one knows what love and faith are, and it only remains to determine their place in the System” (p. 307). Further references may be found on the following pages of this work: 16, 18, 71, 97, 104, 106f., 109–113, 115f., 119, 131f., 134, 141, 153, 167f., 219, 223f., 240, 266, 272, 276, 301f., 308f., 312, 415, and 419.
Alastair McKinnon, “Similarities and Differences in Kierkegaard’s Accounts of Hegel,”Kierkegaardiana, X (1977). This list in question is shown as Table 3.
Cf., e.g., Wittgenstein’s now famous remark: “For alarge class of cases — though not for all — in which we use the word ‘meaning’ it can be defined thus: the meaning of a word is its use in the language.”Philosophical Investigations: Blackwell (1967), 43.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McKinnon, A. From co-occurrences to concepts. Comput Hum 11, 147–155 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02401444
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02401444