[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Defining Concept

To: "Deborah MacPherson" <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:41:55 -0600
Message-id: <p06230901c1d94624019c@[]>
>Why does it have to be a word?    (01)

Well, this thread started with a question about 
what word to use, which kind of set the tone.    (02)

>Why cant it be a drawing instead? An unlabeled 
>map, or labels of ontology specific words could 
>turn on and off.    (03)

I can't really see what you are talking about here. Can you give more details?    (04)

>By drawing I mean the full extent of one 
>universal view governed by one ontology. Another 
>area, another ontology, a different drawing.    (05)

Hmmm, I still can't see it. An ontology is, 
typically, a bunch of assertions in some logical 
notation. Such a bunch can sometimes be presented 
graphically (as a topic map or a concept map or a 
semantic network or a conceptual graph) but a 
concept is then a single node or label in that 
graphic, not the entire "drawing". Also, its the 
mathematical graph structure of the thing that 
matters, not its graphic presentation in an 
artistic sense (maybe you didnt mean to imply 
that?)    (06)

Or maybe you meant something else entirely?    (07)

Pat Hayes    (08)

>Debbie MacPherson
>On 1/19/07, Pat Hayes <<mailto:phayes@xxxxxxx>phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>  >  > Facet
>>>  Assembly
>>>  Bound or Bounded
>>>  Prime (as in an indivisible prime number)
>>>  Set
>>>  Totality
>>>  or
>>>  Resource
>>er... what problem is being sorted out here? All of these
>>terms are already overloaded to the nth degree and
>>have non-overlapping meanings; as does
>>Aspect. If there was ever a good example of why ontology
>>can and should use an axiomatised formalisation
>>instead of natural language terms, then
>>I guess this is it! :-)
>I entirely agree. It is impossible to use a
>normal English word to express something
>technical without  its being overloaded.
>I have another problem with this thread: I have
>no idea what, er, concept is being discussed.
>Charles said:
>"....  a universal, non-divisible idea.  This "concept"
>when combined with others forms the definition of an entity."
>Wha?? First, what distinguishes "universal" ideas
>from (I presume) non-universal ones? Second, what
>does it mean for an idea to be "divisible"?
>Third, what kind of combination are we talking
>about? I would suggest (following Fodor) that the
>key idea here is not the things you are calling
>'concepts', which in almost every detailed
>account that has ever been put forward turn out
>to be little more than nodes in a graph or points
>in a space, but rather the 'combinations' that
>they take part in, or rather still the
>*structure* of these combinations. It is the
>space (or maybe, the network, or the relational
>structure, or whatever one wants to call it)
>which matters and which gives the
>points/nodes/names/identifiers in it the
>"conceptual" structure that they have.
>Pat Hayes
>>John B.
>>Message Archives: 
>>Shared Files: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>Community Wiki: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>To Post: 
>IHMC            (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
>40 South Alcaniz St.    (850)202 4416   office
>Pensacola                       (850)202 4440   fax
>FL 32502                        (850)291 0667    cell
>Message Archives: 
>Shared Files: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: 
>Deborah MacPherson
>The content of this email may contain private
>confidential information. Do not forward, copy,
>share, or otherwise distribute without explicit
>written permission from all correspondents.
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ 
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ 
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    (09)

IHMC            (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.    (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                       (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                        (850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes    (010)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (011)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>