Talk:Genus–differentia definition

message: Firstly, perhaps a compromise will do:
: Genus and Differentia
In any case, the title Genus–differentia definition seems to be suitable:
* Characterizing the definitions of anatomical concepts in WordNet and specialized sources
:: (Bodenreider and Burgun, 2002, whole document)
:: [11 or so uses of "genus-differentia definition"; note that they use a hyphen rather than an en-dash, which is what this Wikipedia article used initially.]
* Genus and Differentia: Reconciling Unity in Definition
:: (Vogler, 2004, p.23)
:: Both the unequivocal and analogical theories have failed to explain how a genus-differentia definition is not two terms...
However, as another alternative, the article Definition has long had the section:
: Definition by genus and differentia
Though a bit circuitous, it would be a decent article title:
* It captures your notion of a 'method'.
* It is a well-known phrase.
:* An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
::: (Locke, 1836, p.297)
::: ...defining by genus and differentia (I crave leave to use these terms of art, through originally Latin, since they properly suite those notions they are applied to)...
:* The collected writings of James Henley Thornwell, Volume 4
::: (Thornwell and edited by Adger and Girardeau, 1873, p.263)
::: Dr. Hodge affirms that there are two modes of defining—one by genus and differentia, the other by enumeration of attributes.
:* The principles of empirical or inductive logic
::: (Venn, 1889, p.310)
::: This was the time-honoured method of assigning a Definition 'by genus and differentia'.
:* Understanding Educational Research. An Introduction
::: (Van Dalen, 1962–1979, pp.182–183)
::: Definition by genus and differentia. Indicating its genus (the larger class of things in which the referent is included) and then how it differs from other subclasses of the same genus.
:* Definition in Jurisprudence (The Philosophical Quarterly)
::: (Hacker, 1969, p.343)
::: He argued that these concepts can be defined, but not by the traditional form of definition by genus and differentia.
:* Logic: The Essentials
::: (Manicas and Kruger, 1976, p.36)
::: ...acknowledge the importance of definition by genus and differentia.
:* Aristotle's Concept of Dialectic
::: (Evans, 1977, p.111)
::: ...which refers back to the discussion in Met. Z12 of definitions by genus and differentia.
:* Standardization of Technical Terminology: Principles and Practices - STP 806
::: (ASTM Committee on Terminology and edited by Interrante and Heymann, 1983, p.134)
::: The form of definitions, of course, remains a very important matter for ASTM. In that regard, Felber describes two important types: the intensional and the extensional. The first of these, also known as the definition by genus and differentia, is generally the preferred type in ASTM... straight forward example of definition by genus and differentia...
:* Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine
::: (Sowa, 1984, p.13)
::: Definitions in terms of primitives ultimately derive from Aristotle's mode of definition by genus and differentia.
:* Substance and essence in Aristotle: an interpretation of Metaphysics VII-IX
::: (Witt, 1989, p.109)
::: An answer favored by Aristotle in many contexts is the definition by genus and differentia... The definition by genus and differentia places individuals into kinds...
:* John Philoponus' New Definition of Prime Matter
::: (Haas, 1996, p.186)
::: definition by genus and differentia
:* Reason Papers (Issue 21): Review Essay: Tara Smith, Moral Rights and Political Freedom
::: (Khawaja, 1996, p.61)
::: By contrast, Smith insists on the need for a definition by genus and differentia.
:* The pragmatics of defining religion: contexts, concepts, and contests
::: (edited by Platvoet and Molendijk, 1999, p.315)
::: Is a Definition by Genus and Differentia Specifica Possible?... definition by genus and differentia specifica is probably possible.
:* Aristotle: critical assessments, Volume 2
::: (Gerson, 1999, p.100)
::: This suggests that the notion of a what-is-it is not pegged to definition per genus et differentia... Aristotle's characterization of the method of division as definition per genus et differentia.
:* What Art Is: The Esthetic Theory of Ayn Rand
::: (Torres and Kamhi, 2000, p.375)
::: The most recent edition of Britannic (1997)... does include a reference to "definition by genus and differentia"...
:* Aristotle on Meaning and Essence
::: (Charles, 2000, p.247)
::: It's completed definitions by refer to differentiation through genus and differentia... So understood, there is no contrast or tension between definition by genus and differentia and definition by causally basic feature... Some have argued that Aristotle offers several distinct theories of definition, which fail to form a unified whole: definition by genus and differentia...
:* Essays on Definition
::: (Sager, 2000, p.243)
::: ...in mathematics the definition by genus proximum and differentia specifica...
:* Aristotle's Metaphysics
::: (Cohen, 2000, Substance and Definition)
::: This is a classic definition by genus and differentia.
:* A Concise Introduction to Logic
::: (Hurley, 2004, pp.106–108)
::: A definition by genus and difference assigns meaning to a term by identifying a genus term and one or more difference words...
:* The Blackwell dictionary of Western philosophy
::: (Bunnin and Yu, 2004, p.166)
::: Definition by Genus and Difference... from Latin genus et differentia... The most generally applicable form of intensional definition.
:* Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics
::: (Brown, 2009, p.200)
::: Porphyry's Eisagogē was translated into Latin by Boethius, and it is through Boethius that the tradition of defining by genus and differentiae has been transmitted to us.
:* Being, Nature, and Life in Aristotle: Essays in Honor of Allan Gotthelf
::: (Lennox and Bolton, 2010, p.94)
::: Aristotle says regarding definition by genus and differentia...
:* University of Washington:
::: The Form of a Definition by genus and differentia...
:* philosophypages.com:
::: Definition by Genus and Differentia... Copi and Cohen list five rules by means of which to evaluate the success of connotative definitions by genus and differentia...
::* Oregon State University:
::: [The information on the above page is copied verbatim for an introdcutory course; Oregon State's copy is not well formatted, suggesting it was copied and pasted.]
Mfwitten (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Title 

message: From my own shelves, I've found the following references.
* Copi's "Introduction to Logic", The Macmillan Company, 1961, pp. 118-127.  
:*Includes a discussion of "human" as "rational animal" and makes the point that, from a logical viewpoint, we could just as well take "rational" as the genus and "animal" as the difference.  (Grammatically, there is a slight difference not mentioned by Copi, namely that a genus is a class, while a difference is a predicate, but this is trivially fixed by saying the genus is "rational thing" and the difference "is an animal".)
:*Also includes rules for writing a good definition by genus-difference.
* Copi and Cohen's "Introduction to Logic", Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 105-109.  A much more recent descendant of the above.  
:*Includes rules for writing a good definition.  I haven't checked whether they are the same rules as the above.
:* Omits both the discussion of "rational animal" and the claim that the choice of genus and difference is arbitrary (in the sense mentioned above, that we could take the difference as the genus and vice versa).
*Hurley, "A Concise Introduction to Logic", 10th edition, Thomson Wadsworth 2008, pp. 101-102
:* Includes a claim that "Definition by genus and difference is the most effective of the intensional definitions for producing the five kinds of definition discussed in Section 2.3."  The five kinds of definition discussed are stipulative, lexical, precising, theoretical and persuasive.  The other kinds of intensional definitions discussed therein are synonymous definition, etymological definition and operational definition.
* Layman, "The Power of Logic", 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, 2005.  pp. 101-106
:* Again, includes criteria for evaluating such definitions.
These are four of the first six books I grabbed off of my shelf.  The only two which do not discuss genus-difference are Baronet's Logic and Washburn's The Vocabulary of Critical Thinking (which is not so focused on logic per se).  It should be very easy to add references to this article.
We should probably also refer to Aristotle's treatment of such definitions.  I don't know where that occurs offhand. Phiwum (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Phiwum for your edits and seeking assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philosophy#Aristotle on Genus/Difference?. This is as much, and more, as one could ask for. I am also not familiar with the aspects you mentioned but know that in the previous form the article should have been titled "Aristotle's view on Genus–differentia", or some other such name, except the article still did not reflect the contents of the reference. I have been working very long hours so have not had time to devote to such a profound subject so thanks again. Otr500 (talk) 10:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some notes about references. 

message: I was just wondering if this method of definition includes those which start by (perhaps implicitly) abstracting from an existing definition to create a genus, and then becoming more specific again with different differentia - or if there is a different term for such a process.
As an example of what I mean I offer the definition of "Scotch Chess": It's chess, but after White's first move, each player makes several consecutive moves, namely one more than the number of moves made by the previous player.
The abstraction made is "chess, except that the order in which the order of play remains unspecified", followed by differentiation by specifying an order of play that is different to that of chess.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.162.181.145 (talk) 20:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition by abstraction then speciation?