[blml] ABF seminar - Law 27C

[Eric Landau]

On Feb 1, 2008, at 7:43 PM, <gesta at tiscali.co.uk>  
<gesta at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Landau" <ehaa at starpower.net>
>
>>> Maybe it is my dyslexia, but I find the way the law
>>> uses the word "incorporates" almost permanently
>>> confusing.  What Venn diagram symbolizes "incorporating
>>> information"?  I don't think an information theorist would
>>> be sure what is meant, so a rewording or a clarification is
>>> in order.

I was actually Jerry who wrote that.  I responded (snipped by  
Grattan) with, "Think of the 'information' from a call as being the  
set of potential hands that could be held for that call.  Then set  
theory works too.  See Alain's post to this thread."

> +=+ In my discussions of Law 27C currently I introduced
> Wayne's comment. Here is a response I received from the
> WBF CTD:
> "In drawing his Venn diagrmans, I assume Laurie Kelso began
> with a fairly small circle for the information 'I have 0-12 points',
> (or whatever the example was) as this doesn't really contain
> very much information at all. Then he drew a larger circle around
> it for the information 'I have 5-9 points', as this contains quite a
> lot of additional information.
>
> Then he drew a huge circle around both of these to represent
> the information 'I have 6 points', as this contains all the  
> information
> in the universe as far as point count is concerned.
>
> The little old lady you describe below would not then have
> followed her confused line of logic, and would have seen
> that it is 5-9 which incorporates 0-12, and not the other
> way round."

So my Venn diagrams would be sized in the opposite order from  
Grattan's, and Alain's analysis ("The fact is, we have here an  
interesting example of definitional inclusion") would apply.

The obvious conclusion from this is that Venn diagrams are *not* a  
useful tool for explaining L27C!


Eric Landau
1107 Dale Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
ehaa at starpower.net