DEFINITION
Charles François (2004). DEFINITION, International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics, 2(1): 841.
| Collection | International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics |
|---|---|
| Year | 2004 |
| Vol. (num.) | 2(1) |
| ID | ◀ 841 ▶ |
| Object type | Epistemology, ontology or semantics |
A statement aiming at establishing the precise meaning of a term or expression.
The problem of definition is central to systemic and cybernetic semantics.
In J. WARFIELD's words: “… the definition of a term is in itself an operation of integration, but what is integrated varies from one approach to another” (1988, p.335).
WARFIELD establishes the following taxonomy of definitions:
- “Definition by Naming. In this, the weakest form of definition, a concept is given a unique name and that is all that is overtly available to give it an identity.
- “Second, one may consider Definition by Extension. In this mode, well established historically, one deals with a class name. The class is defined by presenting a set of names of exemplars of the class. This approach may often serve for initial introduction to a concept. It does not provide the depth of insight to allow one to answer such a critical question as to whether a concept X, not yet accepted as a member of the class, can or should belong to the class.
- “Thirdly, one may consider Definition by intension. In this mode, one deals with a concept (which can be a class), and defines the concept by citing that set of attributes that is perceived to be integral to the concept. Oddly, this approach may involve both a division and an integration. The integration brings together a set of attributes thought to belong to the concept, while at the same time producing a division of the concept into the set of attributes, leaving open questions of completeness at times.
- “A fourth type of definition is Definition by Relationship… but the extent of the relationship is a matter of considerable importance… Definition by Relationship is the highest grade of the four modes discussed” (p. 335-6).
Definition by Relationship implies the use of DE MORGAN's Theory of Relations, whose systemic and cybernetic character is obvious.
The basic methodology used in this dictionary is definition by relationship, taking in account that any language (current, specialized or formalized) tends to be organizationally closed.