[FRIAM] Can you guess the source.

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Frank wrote:
> It seems to me that "sameSex" is reflexive on the set of all humans.
> The only thing that would falsify that would be a human who is not the
> same sex as him or her self.
>   
The set of all humans is not reflexive due to ambiguity.

sameSex(x0,x1) := (hasMaleSexOrgan (x0) and hasMaleSexOrgan (x0)) xor 
(hasFemaleSexOrgan (x1) and hasFemaleSexOrgan (x1))

...which is false even when x0 and x1 = x when x reports true for both 
kinds of sex organs.

I wrote:
> Are their precise metrics for the features that R draws upon, or does 
> the meta-analyst just have that convenience?
Frank wrote:
> On the other hand, some mathematicians might ask, "What has the world
> got to do with it?"
Other than you can get almost answer you want by fooling with the 
relation definition?