Right:
All are "all but one are ___"; all but one are black.
All are "every other is ___"; every other is solid polygons.
All are "gradually becoming ___"; gradually becoming thickly outlined.
Left:
All but one are "all but one are ___".
Every other is "every other is ___".
Gradually becoming "gradually becoming ___".
Here is another way of putting it:
Call it "meta" when the whole imitates its parts, and call it "doubly-meta" when the whole imitates its parts with respect to the way it imitates its parts. Left are doubly-meta, while right are just meta.
Here is a more belabored way of putting it:
Call something like "is star-shaped" a "rule". An object can satisfy a rule.
Call something like "all but one are ___" a "rule-parametrized rule". A collection of objects can satisfy a rule-parametrized rule with respect to a particular rule.
On the right: every collection fits the same rule-parametrized rule (with respect to various rules); furthermore the collection of collections fits that same rule-parametrized rule (with respect to some unrelated rule that collections can satisfy).
On the left: The collection of collections fits a rule-parametrized rule with respect to the rule of fitting that rule-parametrized rule (with respect to various rules).
Previously, an unintended solution to this BP was "not all groups share some noticeable property vs. all do." It is hard to come up with examples foiling this alternative solution because the rule-parametrized rule (see explanation above) usually has to do with not all objects in the collection fitting the rule. (See BP568, which is about BP ideas that are always overridden by a simpler solution.) The example EX10108 "all five are 'all five are ___'" was added, foiling the alternative solution. |