I think I agree with essentially everything you are saying here? Except that I was trying to emphasize something different from what you are emphasizing.
More specifically: I was trying to emphasize the point that [the concept that the word “cooperation” currently points to] is very fuzzy. Because it seemed to me that this was insufficiently clear (or at least not common knowledge). And appreciating this seemed necessary for ppl agreeing that (1) our mission should be to find crisp concepts in the vicinity of the fuzzy one (2) but that we shouldn’t be surprised when those concepts fail to fully capture everything we wanted. (And also (3) avoiding unnecessary arguments about which definition is better, at least to the extent that those only stem from (1) + (2).)
And to highlight a particular point: I endorse your claim about crisp concepts, but I think it should be ammended as follows:
You should not be seeking a crisp definition of a fuzzy concept, you should be seeking a crisp concept or concepts in the neighbourhood of your fuzzy one, that can better do the work of the fuzzy one. However, you should keep in mind that the given collection of crisp concepts might fail to capture some important nuances of the fuzzy concept.
(And it is fine that this difference is there—as long as we don’t forget about it.)
I think I agree with essentially everything you are saying here? Except that I was trying to emphasize something different from what you are emphasizing.
More specifically: I was trying to emphasize the point that [the concept that the word “cooperation” currently points to] is very fuzzy. Because it seemed to me that this was insufficiently clear (or at least not common knowledge). And appreciating this seemed necessary for ppl agreeing that (1) our mission should be to find crisp concepts in the vicinity of the fuzzy one (2) but that we shouldn’t be surprised when those concepts fail to fully capture everything we wanted. (And also (3) avoiding unnecessary arguments about which definition is better, at least to the extent that those only stem from (1) + (2).)
And to highlight a particular point: I endorse your claim about crisp concepts, but I think it should be ammended as follows:
(And it is fine that this difference is there—as long as we don’t forget about it.)