Are people aware of this the danger of this kind of ambiguity?

[Copernicus]

I was once in a meeting of robotics researchers in which one participant said that we needed to develop theorem-proving systems that were better at resolving contradictions so that they could resolve ambiguity in their perceptions. Another participant pointed out rather forcefully that we needed to develop systems that could manage contradictions rather than eliminate them, because reasoning under uncertainty always involved contradictory information. Robots need to be able to change their minds, and they can't do so if they always resolve contradictory information.

Optical illusions are contradictory models of the same visual sensor data.

Consider a Necker cube:


We perceive it as a 3D image that faces in one of two directions. It is a visually ambiguous fiction, because it is really a 2-dimensional image with two overlapping squares connected with lines. We resolve the contradiction by thinking of one square in the foreground and the other in the background. So we can switch back and forth between the two, depending on the way we construe the context--different perspectives brought to bear on the same visual data. Deduction plays a role in that perception, because we deduce the sides of the cube on the basis of that shifting perspective.

Linguistic ambiguity is much more complex than a Necker cube, but the principles that govern linguistic disambiguation are much the same. That is, we build up different contexts in our minds, and we deduce other aspects of the context to arrive at the meaning of a linguistic expression. Linguistic meaning is always an illusion created from logical building blocks. As one of the great semanticists of the 20th century, Charles Fillmore, once put it to me--"Language is word-guided mental telepathy." That is, it enables us to see into each other's minds by evoking shared knowledge that we convey through language conventions.

Whether it is appropriate to say that the bag contains "2 oranges" depends on the context that is the key to understanding the expression.

 

[untermensche]

Give an example.

Because if I am buying something I know what I am buying.

There are many examples outside of day-to-day purchases. Contractors can live well or die by ambiguous contracts. "The devil is in the details" quote exists for a reason. Perhaps the best examples though take place in the courtroom.

I don't believe you.

Give an example.

 

[ryan]

There are many examples outside of day-to-day purchases. Contractors can live well or die by ambiguous contracts. "The devil is in the details" quote exists for a reason. Perhaps the best examples though take place in the courtroom.

I don't believe you.

Give an example.

Exactly what don't you believe about this? You know a huge part of practicing law is contract law, right? Asking me for an example of ambiguous contracts is like asking me for an example of somebody getting a divorce and needing a divorce lawyer. It is just such a well-known part of the world that I don't even know what to say.

 

[untermensche]

I don't believe you.

Give an example.

Exactly what don't you believe about this? You know a huge part of practicing law is contract law, right? Asking me for an example of ambiguous contracts is like asking me for an example of somebody getting a divorce and needing a divorce lawyer. It is just such a well-known part of the world that I don't even know what to say.

Ambiguity exists.

But it exists in many forms. There is not just one kind of ambiguity.

The form in which it exists in the OP is not a real world problem.

Unless you can provide a real world example.

 

[ryan]

Exactly what don't you believe about this? You know a huge part of practicing law is contract law, right? Asking me for an example of ambiguous contracts is like asking me for an example of somebody getting a divorce and needing a divorce lawyer. It is just such a well-known part of the world that I don't even know what to say.

Ambiguity exists.

But it exists in many forms. There is not just one kind of ambiguity.

The form in which it exists in the OP is not a real world problem.

Unless you can provide a real world example.

Before I get started, now that we have had this discussion, I hope you will notice just how HUGE of an issue contract "misunderstandings" are, and I use that description with quotes because I have close friends who are contractors and I don't want to be harsh.

So I asked my friend whom I was thinking of when I made the initial claim. He always tells me about how contracts are the key to him making a very good living. You are kind of lucky here to get this inside information because contractors clearly don't want to admit this to people. And people in high places that get burnt don't really like to tell people how they fell into a "misunderstanding".

I warn you, what you are about to read may disgust you.

My friend is a construction contractor. He says that he will take advantage of ambiguities in contracts that he fills out that are given to him . His example (he really did just tell me this believe it or not) is that when he is putting in his summary of costs together with quotes for different parts of the project, he will look for specific content of the contract regarding total estimate versus segment costs. If the contract does not have this "specific content" that he hopes they missed, then he can actually leave a line blank in the cost summary.

Now when he does this it means that his quote can actually be lower which of course gives him a huge advantage over other estimates/contractors.

Then he says that later in the actual development of the project an awkward time will come when the client asks why they have to pay more than the actual estimate. He will then show them that the contract was not specific on the content (the specific content he didn't say). I suppose he asked his lawyer about this, but I don't know. All I know is that he never loses a court battle when they go after him, and it usually does not come to that because the client will usually understand what they did wrong in the contract.

Basically the contract left out a specification or misguidedly specified that the final estimate was based on the summary report. And if they missed the blank segment estimate in the summary report while enjoying the prospect of a very low overall estimate, then they are agreeing to only a partial estimate without knowing it. Really, this happens with very large and smart organizations!

added: (I even want to add that he also said, and this is very much well known in the industry, that that is why he doesn't like nonbusiness savy governments being directly involved in their expenditures because savy contractors suck them dry)

 

[untermensche]

My friend is a construction contractor. He says that he will take advantage of ambiguities in contracts that he fills out that are given to him . His example (he really did just tell me this believe it or not) is that when he is putting in his summary of costs together with quotes for different parts of the project, he will look for specific content of the contract regarding total estimate versus segment costs. If the contract does not have this "specific content" that he hopes they missed, then he can actually leave a line blank in the cost summary.

Now when he does this it means that his quote can actually be lower which of course gives him a huge advantage over other estimates/contractors.

This is not the ambiguity of saying you have 2 apples in a bag, when you do have 2 apples, but also have more.

It is the ambiguity of making somebody think the bag will cost 5 dollars when it will actually cost 10.

 

[ryan]

My friend is a construction contractor. He says that he will take advantage of ambiguities in contracts that he fills out that are given to him . His example (he really did just tell me this believe it or not) is that when he is putting in his summary of costs together with quotes for different parts of the project, he will look for specific content of the contract regarding total estimate versus segment costs. If the contract does not have this "specific content" that he hopes they missed, then he can actually leave a line blank in the cost summary.

Now when he does this it means that his quote can actually be lower which of course gives him a huge advantage over other estimates/contractors.

This is not the ambiguity of saying you have 2 apples in a bag, when you do have 2 apples, but also have more.

It is the ambiguity of making somebody think the bag will cost 5 dollars when it will actually cost 10.

Maybe it wasn't a perfect analogy. But generally, the example is basically saying that the contractor is saying that he owes the client 80% of the work in order to do the implied 100% of the work. It is true that the contractor owes 80%, but he also "should" owe the other 20% of the work too.

If I were buying apples for a dollar an apple, and my math was horrible, I could give the cashier a 10 dollar bill and the cashier could say that he owes me 8 apples. All is legally fine.

 

[Malintent]

This is why legal language is so complex. As others have said, "natural language" is imprecise.

If a legal contract had the language, ".... in the event there are 2 oranges in the bag....", that would trigger the clause if at any point in history there were more than 1 orange, any 2 orange colored objects, and even if at any point the sum of all oranges that ever went into the bag was 2. the bag can hold only 1 orange at a time, maybe. but even if two different oranges were stored in the bag, one at a time at two different points, it would trigger.

The legal language would be more specific and complex.. more like, "...in the event that exactly two (2) distinct and separate fruits, no more nor less, that are commonly known to be oranges, or within the orange family of fruits as defined by the department of agriculture in publication xxx, coexist within the confines of the bag simultaneously and during the same period of time, irrespective of juxtaposition, as long as containment of the two (2) oranges can be established by complete closure of the bag's outer fasteners...."

 

[Malintent]

If I were buying apples for a dollar an apple, and my math was horrible, I could give the cashier a 10 dollar bill and the cashier could say that he owes me 8 apples. All is legally fine.

I once paid $20 for one apple.

I was driving down a lonely, long, dusty road with nothing around for a hundred miles when I started getting hungry. I saw a fruit stand by the side of the road up ahead, so I pulled over. The sign said, "special apples, $1 each". Yea, right, I thought. "special" in that there is nothing else to eat within a 2 hour drive. BUT, these apples WERE special... they were called "peanut butter and jelly" apples. I paid and took a bite of one. It tasted like freshly roasted peanuts... amazing! "BUT", I asked, "what about the jelly?" The guy selling the apples said, "turn it over". So, I turned it over and took a bite. OMG! awesome concord grape flavor! So delicious. It was the most amazing apple ever. I took off very happy with the best $1 I ever spent.
Later, down the road several miles, there was another fruit stand. I pulled right over before even seeing the sign... which read (as you might have guessed), "special apples - $5 each". Still skeptical ($5!!!), I inquired. "These are special apples...", he started... "I know, I know", I excitedly interrupted... "what do they taste like?", I asked. "These are Ham and Cheese Apples... nothing else like them on Earth". You know I paid him and took a bite Perfectly cured, honey glazed ham, it tasted exactly like. It made me even more hungry... so I took a few more bites before I realized something was missing.... "Where's the cheese?", I asked. to which the vendor said, "turn it over". I did. I took a bite. Amazingly silky Wisconsin cheddar cheese... the likes of which I never even tasted in a real cheese. I was so impressed and satisfied... I drove on down the road so happy.
several miles later... guess what was on the side of the road... This time, the sign said, "special apples - $20 each". OK, I had no intent on buying a $20 aple, no matter what food it tasted like. "these aren't ordinary apples, sir...." ya, we know. but $20? come on. He continued, "THESE apples, they taste just like pussy". I blinked a few times... "sorry, like what?" "just like pussy". OK. fine. I processed that. All the other apples were so delicious I figured, why not. I paid the man $20 for a pussy-apple. So, I took a bite. "EEEEEEWWWW!", I exclaimed.... it was AWEFULL! TERRIBLE! I spit out the bite I took. I told the guy that something must be wrong with this one... "something is wrong with this apple... it tastes like SHIT!"......... He smiled and said, "Turn it over"