2 ms·

"Cattle production is the most important U.S. agricultural industry" [1] "Animal husbandry, is the branch of agriculture concerned with animals that are raised

"Cattle production is the most important U.S. agricultural industry" [1] "Animal husbandry, is the branch of agriculture concerned with animals that are raised for meat, fibre, milk, or other products" [2] [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/animal-products/cattle-beef/sector-at-a-glance https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/animal-products/cattle-beef/... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_husbandry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_husbandry

erikerikson 1y ago
Thanks for the definitions. Doesn't make for a better existential generalization from the more specific to the more general term.
- seadan83 1y ago
  I have trouble following: "Doesn't make for a better existential generalization from the more specific to the more general term." I kinda think I know what you mean, but could use clarification as I might be offbase. Sorry to reply with only definitions. Just giving evidence that livestock farming is considered agriculture.
  - erikerikson 1y ago
    What I wrote was a clumsy way to express the thought and particularly to use the term "existential generalization". I was thinking that agriculture doesn't include livestock, which was wrong and you pointed that out (thank you :D). I still object to the headline because "agriculture + farmer = crops" whereas "agriculture + rancher = livestock" they interviewed ranchers in one country and came out with a headline that made an assertion about farmers which seems like generalizing into agriculture and then re-instantiating into a subclass. The latter is valid to do but the generalization is taking finding about a smaller class and making claims about the broader class which is error prone at best. This occurs in a context where I have been reading about the use of machine learning for weed identification, weather prediction, saturation analysis, and a whole host of other purposes in the more crop oriented side of agriculture. That made the headline curious but I felt a bit lied to by it which fueled my original objection.

erikerikson 1y ago

Thanks for the definitions. Doesn't make for a better existential generalization from the more specific to the more general term.

seadan83 1y ago
I have trouble following: "Doesn't make for a better existential generalization from the more specific to the more general term." I kinda think I know what you mean, but could use clarification as I might be offbase. Sorry to reply with only definitions. Just giving evidence that livestock farming is considered agriculture.
- erikerikson 1y ago
  What I wrote was a clumsy way to express the thought and particularly to use the term "existential generalization". I was thinking that agriculture doesn't include livestock, which was wrong and you pointed that out (thank you :D). I still object to the headline because "agriculture + farmer = crops" whereas "agriculture + rancher = livestock" they interviewed ranchers in one country and came out with a headline that made an assertion about farmers which seems like generalizing into agriculture and then re-instantiating into a subclass. The latter is valid to do but the generalization is taking finding about a smaller class and making claims about the broader class which is error prone at best. This occurs in a context where I have been reading about the use of machine learning for weed identification, weather prediction, saturation analysis, and a whole host of other purposes in the more crop oriented side of agriculture. That made the headline curious but I felt a bit lied to by it which fueled my original objection.