Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
On the one hand, the hierarchy implies that no language distinguishes a trial unless having a dual, and no language has dual without a plural. On the other hand, the hierarchy provides implications for the morphological marking: if the plural is coded with a certain number of morphemes, then the dual is coded with at least as many morphemes.
Propædia is the historical attempt of the Encyclopædia Britannica to present a hierarchical "Outline of Knowledge" in a separate volume in the 15th edition of 1974. The Outline of Knowledge was a project by Mortimer Adler. Propædia had three levels, 10 "Parts" at the top level, 41 "Divisions" at the middle level and 167 "Sections" at the ...
An example of an implicational hierarchy is that dual pronouns are only found in languages with plural pronouns while singular pronouns (or unspecified in terms of number) are found in all languages. The implicational hierarchy is thus singular < plural < dual (etc.).
A standard representation of the pyramid form of DIKW models, from 2007 and earlier. [1] [2]The DIKW pyramid, also known variously as the knowledge pyramid, knowledge hierarchy, information hierarchy, [1]: 163 DIKW hierarchy, wisdom hierarchy, data pyramid, and information pyramid, [citation needed] sometimes also stylized as a chain, [3]: 15 [4] refer to models of possible structural and ...
Infallibilism – Knowledge is incompatible with the possibility of being wrong. Fallibilism – Claims can be accepted even though they cannot be conclusively proven or justified. Non-justificationism – Knowledge is produced by attacking claims and refuting them instead of justifying them.
Implicational hierarchy, a chain of implicational universals; if a language has one property then it also has other properties in the chain Entailment (pragmatics) or strict implication, the relationship between two sentences where the truth of one requires the truth of the other
A priori and a posteriori knowledge – these terms are used with respect to reasoning (epistemology) to distinguish necessary conclusions from first premises.. A priori knowledge or justification – knowledge that is independent of experience, as with mathematics, tautologies ("All bachelors are unmarried"), and deduction from pure reason (e.g., ontological proofs).
Our knowledge that is a logical consequence of cannot be influenced by empirical knowledge. [1] Deductively valid arguments can be known to be so without recourse to experience, so they must be knowable a priori. [ 1 ]