On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:56:22PM -0700, Duane Nickull wrote:
> Is it true that a formal ontology is a circular reference pattern,
> albeit a very indirect, complicated and very large one? Does any
> definition assume the knowledge of other axioms in a model, that
> themselves may be dependent upon the definition one is trying to
> clarify? (01)
Well, if a definition of a concept *does* make use of concepts that are
axiomatized in terms of concept being defined, then it is just a bad
definition. There is certainly nothing in the idea of a formal ontology
per se that would somehow make such definitions inevitable. (02)
Chris Menzel (03)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (04)
|