No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

An individual or whole we understand to be whatever is represented in any given discourse by signs belonging to the lowest logical type of which that discourse makes use. What is conceived as an individual and what as a class is thus relative to the discourse within which the conception occurs. One task of applied logic is to determine which entities are to be construed as individuals and which as classes when the purpose is the development of a comprehensive systematic discourse.The concept of an individual and that of a class may be regarded as different devices for distinguishing one segment of the total universe from all that remains. In both cases, the differentiated segment is potentially divisible, and may even be physically discontinuous. The difference in the concepts lies in this: that to conceive a segment as a whole or individual offers no suggestion as to what these subdivisions, if any, must be, whereas to conceive a segment as a class imposes a definite scheme of subdivision—into subclasses and members.The relations of segments of the universe are treated in traditional logistic at two places, first in its theorems concerning the identity and diversity of individuals, and second in its calculus of membership and class-inclusion. But further relations of segments and of classes frequently demand consideration. For example, what is the relation of the class of windows to the class of buildings? No member of either class is a member of the other, nor are any of the segments isolated by the one concept identical with segments isolated by the other. Yet the classes themselves have a very definite relation in that each window is a part of some building. We cannot express this fact in the language of a logistic which lacks a part-whole relation between individuals unless, by making use of some special physical theory, we raise the logical type of each window and each building to the level of a class—say a class of atoms—such that any class of atoms that is a window will be included (class-inclusion) in some class that is a building. Such an unfortunate dependence of logical formulation upon the discovery and adoption of a special physical theory, or even upon the presumption that such a suitable theory could in every case be discovered in the course of time, indicates serious deficiencies in the ordinary logistic. Furthermore, a raising of type like that illustrated above is often precluded in a constructional system by other considerations governing the choice of primitive ideas.

A total of 463 respiratory specimens, all smear positive for acid-fast bacteria, were inoculated onto routine solid media and into BACTEC 7H12 Middlebrook medium for detection of mycobacterial growth. Conventional drug susceptibility testing (1% proportion method) was performed on Middlebrook 7H10/7H11 medium, and radiometric susceptibility testing was performed on BACTEC 7H12 medium. The average detection times for BACTEC-positive cultures were 8.3 days for Mycobacterium tuberculosis and 5.2 days for mycobacteria other than tuberculosis; by conventional methods, they were 19.4 and 17.8 days, respectively. These detection times do not include time required for identification, which was done by the conventional method only. There was an excellent correlation in the recovery rates of mycobacteria by the two methods. Drug susceptibility test results of M. tuberculosis isolates by the two methods showed 95.1 to 100% overall agreement. The average reporting time for drug susceptibility results ranged from 4.2 to 6.9 days for the BACTEC method and 13.7 to 21 days for the conventional methods. An average of 18 days was required by the BACTEC method for complete recovery and drug susceptibility testing of M. tuberculosis, as compared with 38.5 days for the conventional methods.

We do not believe in abstract entities. No one supposes that abstract entities—classes, relations, properties, etc.— exist in space-time; but we mean more than this. We renounce them altogether.We shall not forego all use of predicates and other words that are often taken to name abstract objects. We may still write ‘x is a dog,’ or ‘x is between y and z’; for here ‘is a dog’ and ‘is between … and’ can be construed as syncate-gorematic: significant in context but naming nothing. But we cannot use variables that call for abstract objects as values. In ‘x is a dog,’ only concrete objects are appropriate values of the variable. In contrast, the variable in ‘x is a zoölogical species’ calls for abstract objects as values (unless, of course, we can somehow identify the various zoological species with certain concrete objects). Any system that countenances abstract entities we deem unsatisfactory as a final philosophy.

Required reading at more than 100 colleges and universities throughout North America. “In a way reminiscent of Einstein, Goodman leads us to the very edge of relativism, only then to step back and to suggest certain criteria of fairness and rightness. More so than any other commentator, he has provided a workable notion of the kinds of skills and capacities that are central for anyone who works in the arts.” —Howard Gardner, Harvard University