Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:25:34.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An improvement in the theory of simplicity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Nelson Goodman
Nelson Goodman*
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The present note suggests how the computation of complexity-values outlined in The logical simplicity of predicates may be so modified as to satisfy a more stringent requirement than was there imposed.

By the method of computation described in that article, a basis consisting of two two-place predicates has in general the value 6. Any such basis may be replaced by one four-place predicate that is self-complete with respect to two of its places and also with respect to the remaining two. Such a predicate has but one “joint,” and therefore a value of 5. The consolidation of the two predicates into one thus results in a basis having a lower complexity-value. This does not violate the cardinal rule laid down in that article for testing proposed ways of assigning complexity-values; for, conversely, a four-place predicate that is self-complete in the way described can always be replaced by two two-place prediates. The rule requires a four-place predicate of the kind described to have a higher value than two two-place predicates only if replacement of two two-place predicates by such a four-place predicate is always possible, while replacement of such a four-place predicate by two two-place predicates is not.

However, we might reasonably strengthen our cardinal rule for complexity-valuation by adding as a second requirement:

If each basis of kind A is always replaceable by some basis of kind B, and each basis of kind B is always replaceable by some basis of kind A, then a basis of kind A and a basis of kind B must, in the absence of contrary indications, have the same complexity-value.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , January 1950 , pp. 228 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This Journal, vol. 14 (1949), pp. 32–41.

2 Applicability of predicates referred to in this Note is assumed throughout. For the extension to cases where applicability is not stipulated, see the third paragraph of Section 4 of the article cited in footnote 1.

3 Each of the selections in question is to consist of n different elements; i.e., in making a selection, we are not to choose the same individual from among the occupants of two different places. (Added October 14, 1949.)