Online research in philosophy

We characterize abstraction in computer science by first comparing the fundamental nature of computer science with that of its cousin mathematics. We consider their primary products, use of formalism, and abstraction objectives, and find that the two disciplines are sharply distinguished. Mathematics, being primarily concerned with developing inference structures, has information neglect as its abstraction objective. Computer science, being primarily concerned with developing interaction patterns, has information hiding as its abstraction objective. We show that abstraction through information hiding is a primary factor in computer science progress and success through an examination of the ubiquitous role of information hiding in programming languages, operating systems, network architecture, and design patterns.

I present a general theory of abstraction operators which treats them as variable-binding term- forming operators, and provides a reasonably uniform treatment for definite descriptions, set abstracts, natural number abstraction, and real number abstraction. This minimizing, extensional and relational theory reveals a striking similarity between definite descriptions and set abstracts, and provides a clear rationale for the claim that there is a logic of sets (which is ontologically non- committal). The theory also treats both natural and real numbers as answering to a two-fold process of abstraction. The first step, of conceptual abstraction, yields the object occupying a particular position within an ordering of a certain kind. The second step, of objectual abstraction, yields the number sui generis, as the position itself within any ordering of the kind in question.

Translations from Lambda calculi into combinatory logics can be used to avoid some implementational problems of the former systems. However, this scheme can only be efficient if the translation produces short output with a small number of combinators, in order to reduce the time and transient storage space spent during reduction of combinatory terms. In this paper we present a combinatory system and an abstraction algorithm, based on the original bracket abstraction operator of Schonfinkel [9]. The algorithm introduces at most one combinator for each abstraction in the initial Lambda term. This avoids explosive term growth during successive abstractions and makes the system suitable for practical applications. We prove the correctness of the algorithm and establish some relations between the combinatory system and the Lambda calculus.

A bracket abstraction algorithm is a means of translating λ-terms into combinators. Broda and Damas, in [1], introduce a new, rather natural set of combinators and a new form of bracket abstraction which introduces at most one combinator for each λ-abstraction. This leads to particularly compact combinatory terms. A disadvantage of their abstraction process is that it includes the whole Schonfinkel [4] algorithm plus two mappings which convert the Schonfinkel abstract into the new abstract. This paper shows how the new abstraction can be done more directly, in fact, using only 2n - 1 algorithm steps if there are n occurrences of the variable to be abstracted in the term. Some properties of the Broda-Damas combinators are also considered.

Kit Fine develops a Fregean theory of abstraction, and suggests that it may yield a new philosophical foundation for mathematics, one that can account for both our reference to various mathematical objects and our knowledge of various mathematical truths. The Limits of Abstraction breaks new ground both technically and philosophically.

In this paper we introduce three methods to approach philosophical problems informationally: Minimalism, the Method of Abstraction and Constructionism. Minimalism considers the specifications of the starting problems and systems that are tractable for a philosophical analysis. The Method of Abstraction describes the process of making explicit the level of abstraction at which a system is observed and investigated. Constructionism provides a series of principles that the investigation of the problem must fulfil once it has been fully characterised by the previous two methods. For each method, we also provide an application: the problem of visual perception, functionalism, and the Turing Test, respectively.

Abstraction and Ideation - The Semantics of chemical and biological fundamental concepts. The methods of abstraction and ideation are indispensable tools to introduce new concepts in a scientific terminology. The latter is paradigmatically introduced within the 'protophysical program' whereas abstraction is commonly applied in logics and mathematics. The application within the reconstruction of chemistry and biology causes several problems. Ideation appears to be inadequate whereas the application of abstraction necessitates a critical and minute examination of the corresponding equivalence relations. These problems are solved by the introduction of the method of materially-synthetic (material-synthetische) abstraction which is exemplified by the introduction of the chemical concept of 'substance' (Stoff) and the biological concept of 'hereditary factor' (Erbanlage).

The use of “levels of abstraction” in philosophical analysis (levelism) has recently come under attack. In this paper, I argue that a refined version of epistemological levelism should be retained as a fundamental method, called the method of levels of abstraction. After a brief introduction, in section “Some Definitions and Preliminary Examples” the nature and applicability of the epistemological method of levels of abstraction is clarified. In section “A Classic Application of the Method of Abstraction”, the philosophical fruitfulness of the new method is shown by using Kant’s classic discussion of the “antinomies of pure reason” as an example. In section “The Philosophy of the Method of Abstraction”, the method is further specified and supported by distinguishing it from three other forms of “levelism”: (i) levels of organisation; (ii) levels of explanation and (iii) conceptual schemes. In that context, the problems of relativism and antirealism are also briefly addressed. The conclusion discusses some of the work that lies ahead, two potential limitations of the method and some results that have already been obtained by applying the method to some long-standing philosophical problems.

The goal is to sketch a nominalist approach to mathematics which just like neologicism employs abstraction principles, but unlike neologicism is not committed to the idea that mathematical objects exist and does not insist that abstraction principles establish the reference of abstract terms. It is well-known that neologicism runs into certain philosophical problems and faces the technical difficulty of finding appropriate acceptability criteria for abstraction principles. I will argue that a modal and iterative nominalist approach to abstraction principles circumvents those difficulties while still being able to put abstraction principles to a foundational use.

The goal is to sketch a nominalist approach to mathematics which just like neologicism employs abstraction principles, but unlike neologicism is not committed to the idea that mathematical objects exist and does not insist that abstraction principles establish the reference of abstract terms. It is well-known that neologicism runs into certain philosophical problems and faces the technical difficulty of finding appropriate acceptability criteria for abstraction principles. I will argue that a modal and iterative nominalist approach to abstraction principles circumvents those difficulties while still being able to put abstraction principles to a foundational use.