Weird.
> Because they're trying to find a solution to the sorites paradox,
Exactly and explicitly the opposite!
Why assume that dynamics are crisp if 'individual' isn't?
> Because they're trying to find a solution to the sorites paradox,
Exactly and explicitly the opposite!
Why assume that dynamics are crisp if 'individual' isn't?
But that doesn't happen to these guys and gals who work on fuzzy logic, does it?
Ah, I see. That was our disconnect. That's the opposite of the idea. The logic is just to abandon a discrete boundary (physics does this in many cases). I think my use of 'fuzzy' might have sparked a different debate.
Not one I find convincing (if Science then Philosophy, not Philosophy ∴ not Science ? um...) but I don't much rate 'fuzzy logic' for mathematical reasons. That's another rabbit hole! Thanks for clarifying.