I'm working on a paper to compare predicate logic and term logic. One argument I want to make is that it is hard to infer on uncountable nouns in predicate logic, such as to derive ``Rain-drop is a kind of liquid'' from "Water is a kind of liquid'' and ``Rain-drop is a kind of water'', (which can be early done in term logic, as the one used in NARS).
This is a problem because predicate logic treats a predicate as a set. If you force a uncontable noun to be used as a set, it can be done, but it is not natural at all, and the distinction between "countable noun" and "uncountable noun" is gone. I browsed the website of CYC and cannot found how it is handled in CycL, which is based on predicate logic. Maybe Steve (or others) can give me a clue. The related conceptual issue is whether all concepts should be treated as sets. My answer is no. Pei ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
