Abstraction

{{dablink|This article is about the concept of ''abstraction'' in general. For other uses, see [[abstraction (disambiguation)]].}}

'''Abstraction''' is the process of [[generalization]] by reducing the [[information content]] of a [[concept]] or an observable phenomenon, typically in order to retain only [[information]] which is relevant for a particular [[purpose]]. For example, abstracting a leather soccer ball to a [[ball]] retains only the information on general ball [[attributes]] and [[behaviour]]. Similarly, abstracting an [[emotional state]] to [[happiness]] reduces the amount of information conveyed about the emotional state.

==Thought process==
In [[philosophy|philosophical terminology]], ''abstraction'' is the [[Thinking|thought process]] wherein [[idea]]s are distanced from [[Object (philosophy)|object]]s.

Abstraction uses a [[strategy]] of simplification, wherein formerly concrete details are left ambiguous, vague, or undefined; thus effective [[communication]] about things in the abstract requires an [[intuitive]] or common experience between the communicator and the communication recipient.

[[Image:JerryFelix.JPG|right|thumb|100px|Cat on Mat ''(picture 1)'']]
For example, many different things can be [[red]]. Likewise, many things sit on surfaces (as in ''picture 1'', to the right). The property of ''[[red]]ness'' and the [[Relation of Ideas|relation]] ''[[Sitting|sitting-on]]'' are therefore abstractions of those objects. Specifically, the conceptual diagram ''graph 1'' identifies only three boxes, two ellipses, and four arrows (and their nine labels), whereas the ''picture 1'' shows much more pictorial detail, with the scores of implied relationships as implicit in the picture rather than with the nine explicit details in the graph.

''Graph 1'' details some explicit relationships between the objects of the diagram. For example the arrow between the ''agent'' and ''CAT:Elsie'' depicts an example of an ''[[is-a]]'' relationship, as does the arrow between the ''location'' and the ''MAT''. The arrows between the [[gerund]] ''SITTING'' and the [[noun]]s ''agent'' and ''location'' express the [[diagram]]'s basic relationship; ''"agent is SITTING on location"''; ''Elsie'' is an instance of ''CAT''.

[[Image:Cat-on-mat.GIF|thumb|250px|[[Conceptual graph]] for A Cat sitting on the Mat ''(graph 1)'']]
Although the description ''sitting-on'' (graph 1) is more abstract than the graphic image of a cat sitting on a mat (picture 1), the delineation of abstract things from concrete things is somewhat ambiguous; this ambiguity or vagueness is characteristic of abstraction. Thus something as simple as a newspaper might be specified to six levels, as in [[Douglas R. Hofstadter]]'s illustration of that ambiguity, with a progression from abstract to concrete in ''[[Gödel, Escher, Bach]]'' (1979):
<blockquote>
(1) a publication
:(2) a newspaper
::(3) ''The San Francisco Chronicle''
:::(4) the May 18 edition of the ''Chronicle''
::::(5) my copy of the May 18 edition of the ''Chronicle''
:::::(6) my copy of the May 18 edition of the ''Chronicle'' as it was when I first picked it up (as contrasted with my copy as it was a few days later: in my fireplace, burning)
</blockquote>
An abstraction can thus encapsulate each of these levels of detail with no loss of generality. But perhaps a detective or philosopher/scientist/engineer might seek to learn about some thing, at progressively deeper levels of detail, to solve a crime or a puzzle.

==Referents==
Abstractions sometimes have ambiguous [[referent]]s; for example, "[[happiness]]" (when used as an abstraction) can refer to as many things as there are people and events or [[being|states of being]] which make them happy. Likewise, "[[architecture]]" refers not only to the design of safe, functional buildings, but also to elements of creation and [[innovation]] which aim at elegant solutions to [[construction]] problems, to the use of space, and at its best, to the attempt to evoke an [[emotion|emotional response]] in the builders, owners, viewers and users of the building.

===Instantiation===
Things that do not exist at any particular place and time are often considered abstract. By contrast, instances, or members, of such an abstract thing might exist in many different places and times. Those abstract things are then said to be ''multiply instantiated'', in the sense of ''picture 1'', ''picture 2'', etc., shown above.

It is not sufficient, however, to define ''abstract'' ideas as those that can be instantiated and to define ''abstraction'' as the movement in the opposite direction to instantiation. Doing so would make the concepts 'cat' and 'telephone' abstract ideas since despite their varying appearances, a particular cat or a particular telephone is an instance of the concept "cat" or the concept "telephone". Although the concepts "cat" and "telephone" are ''abstractions'', they are not ''abstract'' in the sense of the objects in ''graph 1'' above.


We might look at other graphs, in a progression from ''cat'' to ''mammal'' to ''animal'', and see that ''animal'' is more abstract than ''mammal''; but on the other hand ''mammal'' is a harder idea to express, certainly in relation to ''[[marsupial]]''.

===Physicality===
A physical object (a possible referent of a concept or word) is considered ''concrete'' (not abstract) if it is a ''particular individual'' that occupies a particular place and time.

Abstract things are sometimes defined as those things that do not exist in [[reality]] or exist only as sensory experience, like the color [[red]]. That definition, however, suffers from the difficulty of deciding which things are real (i.e. which things exist in reality). For example, it is difficult to agree to whether concepts like ''God'', ''the number three'', and ''goodness'' are real, abstract, or both.

An approach to resolving such difficulty is to use ''[[Predicate (grammar)|predicate]]s'' as a general term for whether things are variously real, abstract, concrete, or of a particular property (e.g. ''good''). Questions about the properties of things are then [[propositions]] about predicates, which propositions remain to be evaluated by the investigator. In the ''graph 1'' above, the graphical relationships like the arrows joining boxes and ellipses might denote predicates. Different levels of abstraction might be denoted by a progression of arrows joining boxes or ellipses in multiple rows, where the arrows point from one row to another, in a series of other graphs, say graph 2, etc.

==Abstraction used in philosophy==
Abstraction in [[philosophy]] is the process (or, to some, the alleged process) in [[concept-formation]] of recognizing some set of common features in [[individual]]s, and on that basis forming a concept of that feature. The notion of abstraction is important to understanding some philosophical controversies surrounding [[empiricism]] and the [[problem of universals]]. It has also recently become popular in formal logic under [[predicate abstraction]]. Another philosophical tool for discussion of abstraction is [[Thought space]].

===Ontological status===
The way that physical objects, like rocks and trees, have [[Category of being|being]] differs from the way that properties of abstract concepts or relations have being, for example the way the [[Concrete (philosophy)|concrete]], [[particular]], [[individual]]s pictured in ''picture 1'' exist differs from the way the concepts illustrated in ''graph 1'' exist. That difference accounts for the [[ontology|ontological]] usefulness of the word "abstract". The word applies to properties and relations to mark the fact that, if they exist, they do not exist in space or time, but that instances of them can exist, potentially in many different places and times.

Perhaps confusingly, some [[philosophy|philosophies]] refer to ''[[Trope (philosophy)|tropes]]'' (instances of properties) as ''[[abstract particular]]s''. E.g., the particular [[red]]ness of a particular [[apple]] is an ''abstract particular''.

===In linguistics===
[[Reification]], also called ''hypostatization'', might be considered a [[formal fallacy]] whenever an abstract concept, such as "society" or "technology" is treated as if it were a concrete object. In [[linguistics]] this is called ''[[metonymy]]'', in which abstract concepts are referred to using the same sorts of [[noun]]s that signify concrete objects. Metonymy is an aspect of the English language and of other languages. It can blur the distinction between abstract and concrete things:
:'''1805''': [[Horatio Nelson]] (''[[Battle of Trafalgar]]'') - "[[England expects that every man will do his duty]]"

===Compression===

An abstraction can be seen as a process of mapping multiple different pieces of [[constituent]] data to a single piece of abstract data based on similarities in the constituent data, for example many different physical cats map to the abstraction "CAT". This conceptual scheme emphasizes the inherent equality of both constituent and abstract data, thus avoiding problems arising from the distinction between "abstract" and "[[Concrete (philosophy)|concrete]]". In this sense the process of abstraction entails the identification of similarities between objects and the process of associating these objects with an abstraction (which is itself an object).
:For example, ''picture 1'' above illustrates the concrete relationship "Cat sits on Mat".
Chains of abstractions can therefore be constructed moving from neural impulses arising from sensory [[perception]] to basic abstractions such as color or [[shape]] to experiential abstractions such as a specific cat to [[semantic]] abstractions such as the "idea" of a CAT to classes of objects such as "mammals" and even categories such as "object" as opposed to "action".
:For example, ''graph 1'' above expresses the abstraction "agent sits on location".

This conceptual scheme entails no specific [[hierarchical]] [[taxonomy]] (such as the one mentioned involving cats and mammals), only a progressive [[compression (disambiguation)|compression]] of detail.

==The neurology of abstraction==
Some research into the human [[brain]] suggests that the left and right hemispheres differ in their handling of abstraction. For example, one meta-analysis reviewing human brain lesions has shown a left hemisphere bias during tool usage
<ref>James W. Lewis "Cortical Networks Related to Human Use of Tools" '''12''' (3): 211-231 ''The Neuroscientist'' (June 1, 2006). </ref>.

==Abstraction in art==
Most typically ''abstraction'' is used in the arts as a [[synonym]] for [[abstract art]] in general. Strictly speaking, it refers to art unconcerned with the literal depiction of things from the visible world<ref>[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9003405/abstract-art Encyclopaedia Britannica]</ref>--it can, however, refer to an object or image which has been distilled from the real world, or indeed, another work of art. Artwork that reshapes the natural world for expressive purposes is called abstract; that which derives from, but does not imitate a recognizable subject is called nonobjective abstraction. In the 20th century the trend toward abstraction coincided with advances in science, technology, and changes in urban life, eventually reflecting an interest in psychoanalytic theory. Later still, abstraction was manifest in more purely formal terms, such as color, freed from objective context, and a reduction of form to basic geometric designs. <ref>[http://www.nga.gov/education/american/abstract.shtm National Gallery of Art: Abstraction.]</ref>

In music, ''abstraction'' refers to the abandonment of [[Note|tonality]]. [[Atonality|Atonal]] music has no key signature, and lacking an externally imposed standard, is characterized by its internal relationships.<ref>[http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/ABSTRACT.HTM Washington State University: Glossary of Abstraction.]</ref>

==Abstraction in psychology==

'''[[Carl Jung|Jung's]] definition of abstraction''' broadened its scope beyond the thinking process to include exactly four mutually exclusive, opposing complementary psychological functions: sensation, intuition, feeling, and thinking. Together they form a structural totality of the differentiating abstraction process. Abstraction operates in one of these opposing functions when it excludes the simultaneous influence of the other functions and other irrelevancies such as emotion. Abstraction requires selective use of this structural split of abilities in the psyche. The opposite of abstraction is [[concretism (psychology)|concretism]]. ''Abstraction'' is one of Jung's 57 definitions in Chapter XI of ''[[Psychological Types]]''.

<blockquote>
There is an abstract ''thinking'', just as there is abstract ''feeling'', ''sensation'' and ''intuition''. Abstract thinking singles out the rational, logical qualities ... Abstract feeling does the same with ... its feeling-values. ... I put abstract feelings on the same level as abstract thoughts. ... Abstract sensation would be aesthetic as opposed to sensuous ''sensation'' and abstract intuition would be symbolic as opposed to fantastic ''intuition''. (Jung, [1921] (1971):par. 678).
</blockquote>
==Origins==
{{see also|Modern human behaviour}}
The first symbols of abstract thinking in humans can be traced to fossils dating between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago in Africa.<ref>[http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/january/ochre.htm Abstract Engravings Show Modern Behavior Emerged Earlier Than Previously Thought]</ref><ref>[http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000629D0-B23F-1CCE-B4A8809EC588EEDF Ancient Engravings Push Back Origin of Abstract Thought]</ref>

==See also==
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
* [[Abstract art]]
* [[Abstraction (computer science)]]
* [[Abstraction (mathematics)]]
* [[Abstract structure]]
* [[Abstract (summary)]]
* [[Abstract interpretation]]
* [[Gottlob Frege]]
* [[Hypostatic abstraction]]
* [[Leaky abstraction]]
{{col-break}}
* [[portal:thinking#Topics related to Thinking|List of thinking-related topics]]
* [[Model (abstract)]]
* [[Object of the mind]]
* [[Ontology]]
* [[Charles Peirce]]
* [[Prescisive abstraction]]
* [[Portal: thinking]]
{{col-end}}

==External links==
{{wiktionarypar|abstraction}}

* [http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/f/frege.htm Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Gottlob Frege]
* [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abstract-objects/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Abstract Objects]
* [http://originresearch.com/sd/sd1.cfm Discussion at The Well concerning Abstraction hierarchy]

==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

==References==
* Eugene Raskin, ''Architecturally Speaking, 2nd edition'', a Delta book, Dell (1966), trade paperback, 129 pages
* ''The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 3rd edition'', Houghton Mifflin (1992), hardcover, 2140 pages, ISBN 0-395-44895-6
* Jung, C.G. [1921] (1971). ''Psychological Types'', Collected Works, Volume 6, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01813-8.

[[Category:Abstraction| ]]
[[Category:Philosophical terminology]]
[[Category:Thought]]

[[ar:تجريد]]
[[be-x-old:Абстракцыя]]
[[bs:Apstrakcija]]
[[cs:Abstrakce]]
[[da:Abstraktion]]
[[de:Abstraktion]]
[[es:Abstracción (filosofía)]]
[[eo:Abstraktado]]
[[fa:تجرید]]
[[fr:Abstraction (philosophie)]]
[[gl:Abstracción]]
[[ia:Abstraction]]
[[it:Astrazione]]
[[he:הפשטה]]
[[hu:Absztrakció]]
[[mk:Апстракција]]
[[nl:Abstractie]]
[[ja:抽象化]]
[[pl:Abstrakcja (filozofia)]]
[[pt:Abstração]]
[[ro:Abstractizare]]
[[ru:Абстракция]]
[[sk:Abstrakcia]]
[[sr:Апстрактно мишљење]]
[[sv:Abstraktion]]
[[th:นามธรรม]]
[[tr:Soyutlama]]
[[uk:Абстракція]]
[[zh:抽象化]]