functionalism: be related

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents term
Weight: 0.50
, topic
Weight: 0.50
, view
Weight: 0.49
, theory
Weight: 0.46
, approach
Weight: 0.44
Siblings constructivism
Weight: 0.33
, theology
Weight: 0.31
, formalism
Weight: 0.31
, naturalism
Weight: 0.31
, political ideology
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
be related 1.00
is related 0.99
pertaining to development 0.80
relate in socology 0.77
was linked during ages 0.75

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.61
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(theory, is related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(theory, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(theory, pertaining to development) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(term, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(theory, relate in socology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(term, be related)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(theory, be related)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(theory, is related)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(theory, relate in socology)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(theory, pertaining to development)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(theory, be related)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(theory, is related)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(term, be related)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(theory, pertaining to development)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(theory, relate in socology)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(naturalism, be related)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(theology, was linked during ages)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(theory, is related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(functionalism, be related)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(theory, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(functionalism, be related)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(term, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(functionalism, be related)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(theory, pertaining to development) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(functionalism, be related)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(theory, relate in socology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(functionalism, be related)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(naturalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(naturalism, be related)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(theology, was linked during ages) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(theology, was linked during ages)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(functionalism, be related)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(functionalism, be related)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(term, be related)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(theory, relate in socology)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(theory, be related)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(theory, is related)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(theory, pertaining to development)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(theology, was linked during ages)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(naturalism, be related)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(term, be related)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(theory, be related)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(theory, is related)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(theory, relate in socology)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(functionalism, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(theory, pertaining to development)