Search (9784 results, page 490 of 490)

0.0019697142 = product of:
  0.0039394284 = sum of:
    0.0039394284 = product of:
      0.011818284 = sum of:
        0.011818284 = weight(_text_:c in 3697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011818284 = score(doc=3697,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044950135 = queryNorm
            0.0762218 = fieldWeight in 3697, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3697)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0019697142 = product of:
  0.0039394284 = sum of:
    0.0039394284 = product of:
      0.011818284 = sum of:
        0.011818284 = weight(_text_:c in 5984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011818284 = score(doc=5984,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044950135 = queryNorm
            0.0762218 = fieldWeight in 5984, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=5984)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The library is first divided into nine special libraries which are called Classes. These Classes are Philosophy, Theology, &c., and are numbered with the nine digits. Thus Class 9 is the Library of History; Class 7, the Library of Fine Art; Class 2, the Library of Theology. These special libraries or Classes are then considered independently, and each one is separated again into nine special Divisions of the main subject. These Divisions are numbered from 1 to 9 as were the Classes. Thus 59 is the 9th Division (Zoology) of the 5th Class (Natural Science). A final division is then made by separating each of these Divisions into nine Sections which are numbered in the same way, with the nine digits. Thus 513 is the 3d Section (Geometry) of the 1st Division (Mathematics) of the 5th Class (Natural Science). This number, giving Class, Division, and Section, is called the Classification or Class Number, and is applied to every book or pamphlet belonging to the library. All the Geometries are thus numbered 513, all the Mineralogies 549, and so throughout the library, all the books on any given subject bear the number of that subject in the scheme. Where a 0 occurs in a class number, it has its normal zero power. Thus, a book numbered 510, is Class 5, Division 1, but _no_ Section. This signifies that the book treats of the Division 51 (Mathematics) in general, and is not limited to any one Section, as is the Geometry, marked 513. If marked 500, it would indicate a treatise on Science in general, limited to _no_ Division. A zero occurring in the first place would in the same way show that the book is limited to _no_ Class. The classification is mainly made by subjects or content regardless of _form_; but it is found practically useful to make an additional distinction in these general treatises, according to the form of treatment adopted. Thus, in Science we have a large number of books treating of Science in general, and so having a 0 for the Division number. These books are then divided into Sections, as are those of the other Classes according to the form they have taken on. We have the Philosophy and History of Science, Scientific Compends, Dictionaries, Essays, Periodicals, Societies, Education, and Travels,--all having the common subject, =NATURAL SCIENCE=, but treating it in these varied forms. These form distinctions are introduced here because the number of general works is large, and the numerals allow of this division, without extra labor for the numbers from 501 to 509 would otherwise be unused. They apply _only_ to the general treatises, which, without them, would have a class number ending with two zeros. A Dictionary of Mathematics is 510, not 503, for every book is assigned to the _most specific head that will contain it_, so that 503 is limited to Dictionaries or Cyclopedias of Science _in general_. In the same way a General Cyclopedia or Periodical treats of no one class, and so is assigned to the Class 0. These books treating of no special class, but general in their character, are divided into Cyclopedias, Periodicals, etc. No difficulty is found in following the arithmetical law and omitting the initial zero, so these numbers are printed 31, 32, etc., instead of 031, 032, etc.

0.0019697142 = product of:
  0.0039394284 = sum of:
    0.0039394284 = product of:
      0.011818284 = sum of:
        0.011818284 = weight(_text_:c in 799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011818284 = score(doc=799,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044950135 = queryNorm
            0.0762218 = fieldWeight in 799, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=799)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. auch: http://www.zeit.de/2004/43/C-Enzyklop_8adien-Test.

0.0019697142 = product of:
  0.0039394284 = sum of:
    0.0039394284 = product of:
      0.011818284 = sum of:
        0.011818284 = weight(_text_:c in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011818284 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044950135 = queryNorm
            0.0762218 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Gewisse Themen können Hofstadters Zorn erregen, zum Beispiel die Diskussion über das so genannte inverted spectrum paradox. Wie kann ich sicher sein, dass ein anderer Mensch das, was ich als Rot erlebe, genauso erlebt wie ich und nicht etwa eine Empfindung hat, die ich als Blau bezeichnen würde? Oder das Konzept vom Zombie, einem Wesen, das sich in jeder Hinsicht so verhält wie ein gewöhnlicher Mensch, dem aber alle menschlichen Gefühle fehlen. Oder Bewusstsein und freier Wille. Hofstadter hält beides für Illusionen, für Trugbilder gleich der Murmel im Briefumschlagstapel, allerdings für unvermeidbare, machtvolle Trugbilder. Wir erleben, dass ein Ich in unserem Schädel steckt, aber das ist nur eine Illusion, die von Millionen kleiner Schleifen erzeugt wird, »einem Schwarm bunter Schmetterlinge in einem Obstgarten«. An dieser Stelle ist Hofstadter anderer Meinung als sein Freund, der Philosoph Daniel C. Dennett (mit dem zusammen er das Buch »The Mind's I«, deutsch »Einsicht ins lch«, herausgegeben hat). Aber wie Den-nett, der einem seiner Werke den dreisten Titel »Consciousness Explained« gab, glaubt er, er habe das Bewusstsein erklärt. Das stimmt leider nicht. Beide haben das Bewusstsein nur beschrieben. Einen Regenbogen zu beschreiben ist einfach, ihn zu erklären ist nicht so einfach. Bewusstsein zu beschreiben ist einfach, aber das Wunder zu erklären, durch das ein Haufen Moleküle es hervorbringt, ist nicht so einfach. Ich will meine Karten auf den Tisch legen. Ich gehöre zu der kleinen Gruppe der »Mysterianer«, zu denen auch die Philosophen John R. Searle (der Schurke in Hofstadters Buch), Thomas Nagel, Colin McGinn und Jerry Fodor sowie der Linguist Noam Chomsky, der Mathematiker Roger Penrose und einige andere zählen. Wir sind der Überzeugung, dass kein heute lebender Philosoph oder Naturwissenschaftler auch nur die nebelhafteste Ahnung davon hat, wie Bewusstsein und sein unzertrennlicher Begleiter, der freie Wille, aus einem materiellen Gehirn entstehen (was sie zweifellos tun). Wir sind überzeugt, dass kein Computer, wie wir ihn heute kennen - das heißt, der aus Schaltern und Verbindungsdrähten gebaut ist -, je ein Bewusstsein dessen erlangen wird, was er tut. Das stärkste Schachprogramm wird nicht wissen, dass es Schach spielt, ebenso wenig wie eine Waschmaschine weiß, dass sie Wäsche wäscht.