Prototypes and fuzziness are regarded in this paper as fundamental phenomena in the inherent logic of concepts whose relationship, however, has not been sufficiently clarified. Therefore, modifications are proposed in the definition of both. Prototypes are defined as the elements possessing maximal degree of membership in the given category such thatthis membership has maximal cognitive efficiency in representing theelement. A modified fuzzy set (m-fuzzy set) is defined on aclass (possibly self-contradictory collection) such that its core (the collection of elements with (...) full membership) is aset (self-consistent collection) comprising the finite set of the prototypes. In this scheme of recursive representation the possibility of contradictions, which has been proven to be inevitable in the logic of concepts, islocalized. Finally a related model of the brain''s pattern recognition mechanism is briefly summarized. (shrink)

Many criticisms of prototype theory and/or fuzzy-set theory are based on the assumption that category representativeness (or typicality) is identical with fuzzy membership. These criticisms also assume that conceptual combination and logical rules (all in the Aristotelian sense) are the appropriate criteria for the adequacy of the above “fuzzy typicality”. The present paper discusses these assumptions following the line of their most explicit and most influential expression by Osheron and Smith (1981). Several arguments are made against the above identification, the (...) most important being that representativeness in prototype theory is exclusively based on element-to-element similarity while fuzzy membership is inherently an element-to-category relationship. Also the above criteria for adequacy are criticized from the viewpoint of both prototype theory and fuzzy-set theory as well as from that of both conceptual and logical combination, and also from that of integration. (shrink)

Two experiments examined the typicality structure of contrasting political categories. In Experiment 1, two separate groups of participants rated the typicality of 15 individuals, including political figures and media personalities, with respect to the categories Democrat or Republican. The relation between the two sets of ratings was negative, linear, and extremely strong, r = −.9957. Essentially, one category was treated as a mirror image of the other. Experiment 2 replicated this result, showing some boundary conditions, and extending the result to (...) liberal and conservative categories. The same method was applied to two other pairs of contrasting categories, healthy and junk foods, and male and female jobs. For those categories, the relation between contrasting pairs was weaker and there was less of a direct trade-off between typicality in one category versus typicality in its opposite. The results are discussed in terms of implications for political decision making and reasoning, and conceptual representation. (shrink)

In a related project, the social representation of public order among legal professionals has been explored by means of semi-structured interviews (Smejkalová et al. 2022). The participants of this research represent public order, inter alia, as a stable safeguard of fundamental social values while recognizing its vagueness and inherent propensity for change. This contradiction between its purpose to provide stability while being subject to social or temporal contexts seems akin to the structural approach to social representations. The social representations approach (...) (Moscovici 1961, 2001) is an approach used in social psychology, rooted in the idea that social objects or phenomena must be represented by a social group in order to perform any kind of social function. Within this approach, a structural (Abric 1993) differentiation between a stable, normative central core of a social representation, and flexible periphery has been developed. The contradictions between the stability and dynamics of public order the participants talk about are not dissimilar from the theoretical considerations of the structural approach to social representation. Moreover, Moscovici’s (2001) and Wachelke’s (2012) framing of social representations especially resonates when applied to public order, pointing towards its role as a system facilitating communication and orientation within a social group. The present study utilizes the data available from the transcripts of these interviews with a single focus on the themes of dynamics and stability. It aims to discuss these themes across various disciplines, offering links that might have been overlooked. This study further underscores the usefulness of the social representation approach in legal conceptualization, advocating for the necessity of more synthetic approaches merging philosophy, linguistics (semiotics), social psychology, and law to enrich further understanding in this domain. (shrink)

The Gestalt view of ethics, as developed by the Gestalt psychologists in the middle of the 20th century, led to a particular theory of justice which avoided the shortcomings of other approaches. It took the rules of justice as being based ultimately on the fundamental laws of our psychological make-up.