Category talk:Abstraction

This category is within the scope ofWikiProject Philosophy,a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related tophilosophyon Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join thegeneral discussionabout philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Metaphysics
	Philosophy of language

Linguistics:Philosophy of language

	Linguistics portal This category is within the scope ofWikiProject Linguistics,a collaborative effort to improve the coverage oflinguisticson Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussionand see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
	This category is supported byPhilosophy of language task force.

Psychology

This category is within the scope ofWikiProject Psychology,a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofPsychologyon Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussionand see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles

Mathematics

This category is within the scope ofWikiProject Mathematics,a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofmathematicson Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussionand see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles

Systems

	Systems science portal This category is within the scope ofWikiProject Systems,which collaborates on articles related tosystemsandsystems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
	This category isnot associated with a particular field.Fields are listed on thetemplate page.

?

I have a problem with the whole existence of this category. It doesn't make sense. What do these have in common? It's too vague and arbitrary.Revolver09:12, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Category:Abstraction is the category referring to those thought processes in which ideas are distanced from objects.

Natural language satisfies this requirement, so by this definition, ALL of wikipedia belongs to this category.Revolver09:13, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You're right. It is atechnology.

You're right. Anatural languagewill employ 500 to 50 000 words to describe the universe. And anabstractionis a device to make something more manageable. Since theHrair limitof 7-9 ideas is our natural limit ofcognition,we need additional devices to survive the huge number of terms that Natural language can provide us. Thus, some categories, likenumber,formetc evolved to address this huge mismatch in our ability to think versus talk. The WP category is a step in this direction. Your thoughts on this problem are welcome. We need all the help we can get.Ancheta Wis11:38, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This category (or its position in the hierarchy) looks decidedly POV and confusing to me, especially putting it on the Main Page. --Henrygb00:38, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Category makes no sense

This category makes no sense. AsRevolversaid all natural language is abstraction. I would say all communication is abstraction. What matters is the level of abstraction and the connection between different layers of abstraction.MathMartin15:11, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have no opinion regarding whether this makes sense as a category. However there are issues. Some terms or concepts are far more abstrast than others and what they refer to can vary significantly among those who use them.Fred Bauder13:36, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Fundamental cat

Should this or Cat Thought be the fundamental? Thought makes more sense to my mind.Marskell 15:26, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Examples

I think that there should be some more examples of abstract concepts so that you get a beeter idea of what abstract concepts are.—Precedingunsignedcomment added byHowlinghooves(talk•contribs)02:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is Abstracted

I have no problem with this category, it is itself an abstraction. I do agree that we need more examples and I will see if I can shed some light. My overall feeling right now is that abstraction is a reduction in detail (topicality), but affords an increase in applicability. Perhaps I need a knowledge theorist to help me with the language side of this. I use abstraction a lot to solve complex problems, like how to improve intelligence analysis. Jas(talk)12:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abstraction become a conceptual system's subcategory.

by definition, abstraction is a conceptual systems. So abstraction is a conceptual systems's subcategory, not reverseZipodu(talk)15:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]