On the logical necessity and priority of a monothetic conception of class, and on the consequent inadequacy of polythetic accounts of category and categorization

  • J. P. Sutcliffe
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)

Abstract

For three decades now the ideology of polytypy has held sway in the fields of classification and cognitive science, dictating the direction of research almost to the exclusion — and hence to the detriment — of other lines of thinking. This paper questions that ideology, arguing that monotypy has logical priority over polytypy, and that consequently any polytypics! conception of category and categorization is misguided and in need of re-interpretation. In the development of the argument, historical background to the distinction between monotypy and polytypy is reviewed, a critique of polytypy is presented, its range of application is made explicit by reference to class-of-objects words, and two meanings of “classify” are distinguished to define the agenda of classification.

Keywords

Dinate Culmination 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BECKNER, M. (1959): The Biological Way of Thought. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  2. BOCHENSKI, I. M. (1970): A History of Formal Logic. (2nd edn) I. Thomas, trans. Chelsea Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
  3. FRAENKEL, A. A., BAR-HILLEL, Y., and LEVY, A. (1973): Foundations of Set Theory. (2nd edn) North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  4. GEACH, P. and BLACK, M. (eds.) (1952):Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. HARTIGAN, J.A. (1975): Clustering Algorithms. John Wiley & Son, New York.Google Scholar
  6. JARDINE, N. and SIBSON, R. (1971) Mathematical taxonomy. Wiley, London.Google Scholar
  7. LATTA, R. and MCBEATH, A. (1956): The Elements of Logic. (8th edn) Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  8. MEDIN, D.L. (1989): Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist. 44, 1469–1481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DE MORGAN, A. (1847): Formal Logic. Taylor & Walton, London.Google Scholar
  10. MURTAGH, F. D. (1985): Multidimensional Clustering Algorithms. (COMSTAT Lectures, vol. 4) Physica-Verlag, Vienna and Wurzburg.Google Scholar
  11. ROSCH, E. and LLOYD, B. (eds.) (1978): Cognition and Categorization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  12. ROSCH, E. and MERVIS, C. B. (1975): Family resemblances: studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology. 7, 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. RUSSELL, B. (1964): The Principles of Mathematics. (2nd edn.) Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  14. SOKAL, R.R. and SNEATH, P.H.A. (1963): Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  15. SUPPES, P. (1960): Axiomatic Set Theory. Van Nostrand, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  16. SUTCLIFFE, J. P. (1992): A smooth shave for “fuzzy sets” with Occam’s Razor. 25th Annual Mathematical Psychology Meeting, The Society for Mathematical Psychology, August 21–23. Stanford University, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
  17. SUTCLIFFE, J. P. (1993a): Concept, class, and category in the tradition of Aristotle. Chapter 3 in I. Van Mechelen et al. (eds.) Categories and Concepts: Theoretical Views and Inductive Data Analysis. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  18. SUTCLIFFE, J. P. (1993b): On the commonalities and differentia of multidimensional scaling, numerical taxonomy, and logical taxonomy. 499–504. in R. Steyer et al. (eds.) Psychometric Methodology. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  19. WITTGENSTEIN, L. (1953): Philosophical Investigations. G.E.M. Anscombe Trans. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. P. Sutcliffe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations