Re: Do we have proofs that human think in a fuzzy (logic) way?

From: Gordon D. Pusch (gdpusch@NO.xnet.SPAM.com)
Date: Tue Jan 16 2001 - 03:53:44 MET

  • Next message: albert@massivbau.tu-darmstadt.de: "Re: Fuzzy Implication Rules with Fuzzy Input"

    Martine De Cock <Martine.DeCock@rug.ac.be> writes:

    > Cristian Fabbi wrote:
    >>
    >> studied by FL? Why do we say that with Fuzzy Logic we will make
    >> computers thinking like human?
    >
    > Because we believe "that humans deal with imprecision and uncertainty
    > by using linguistic values and that they apply some kind of approximate
    > reasoning techniques rather than exact numerical values and first order
    > logic". (Fuzzy Sets and Approximate Reasoning, Etienne E. Kerre, Xian
    > Jiaotong University Press, Xian (P.R. China), 1999).

    It does not follow that because humans "deal with imprecision and uncertainty"
    they must therefore be using the specific mathematical formalism called
    ``fuzzy logic'' to do so, or that machines using this mathematical formalism
    will ``think'' exactly the same way humans think. Many different forms of
    approximate, qualitative, and probabilistic reasoning methods have been
    proposed in the literature; there is no evidence that the human reasoning
    process uses _ANY_ of them.

    Moreover, Cox's Theorem [Cox, R.T.: ``Probability, frequency, and
    reasonable expectation,'' Am. J. Phys. v.14, pp.1--13 (1946)] proves
    conclusively that =ALL= possible approximate reasoning methods other than
    Bayesian Probability Theory fail to be logically self-consistent in some
    way or other --- and that includes fuzzy logic. Hence, if any method of
    approximate reasoning is to be preferred, it would have to be Bayesian
    reasoning. (This is =NOT= to say that _humans_ use Bayesian reasoning,
    but only that _if_ we wish our machines to think in a way compatible with
    logic, Bayesian reasoning has been mathematically proved to be the =ONLY=
    approximate reasoning method that is capable of doing so. Any other method
    --- including Fuzzy Logic --- will necessarily yield logical paradoxes
    and inconsistencies under certain circumstances.)

    -- Gordon D. Pusch

    perl -e '$_ = "gdpusch\@NO.xnet.SPAM.com\n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

    ############################################################################
    This message was posted through the fuzzy mailing list.
    (1) To subscribe to this mailing list, send a message body of
    "SUB FUZZY-MAIL myFirstName mySurname" to listproc@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
    (2) To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message body of
    "UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL" or "UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL yoursubscription@email.address.com"
    to listproc@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
    (3) To reach the human who maintains the list, send mail to
    fuzzy-owner@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
    (4) WWW access and other information on Fuzzy Sets and Logic see
    http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/ftp/mlowner/fuzzy-mail.info
    (5) WWW archive: http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/marchives/fuzzy-mail/index.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 04:10:58 MET