ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity

 To: "[ontolog-forum] " Charles D Turnitsa Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:38:41 -0500
 ```John,    (01) There is a great deal of similarity (to me, at least) between the diagram you show below, and the traditional semiotic triangle (which shows the relationship between a referent, an understood meaning for that referent, and a stated term representing that meaning).    (02) One of the useful purposes of the triangle, of course, is to show how strongly a term can represent what it is supposed (the referent) by showing that there are two points of potential misalignment - the first between the referent and the understood meaning (and this is, to me, where the value of a Tarski style truth statement proves invaluable), and the second point is between the understood meaning and the term.    (03) A version of the triangle, and it's value for ontological representation has been shown recently by Barry Smith in his paper from KR-MED in November.    (04) Chuck    (05) Charles Turnitsa Project Scientist Virginia Modeling, Analysis & Simulation Center Old Dominion University Research Foundation (757) 638-6315 (voice) cturnits@xxxxxxx    (06) "John F. Sowa" To Sent by: Pat Hayes ontolog-forum-bou cc nces@xxxxxxxxxxxx "[ontolog-forum]" .net Subject Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual 02/07/07 12:51 PM Complexity    (07) Please respond to "[ontolog-forum] "    (08) Pat,    (09) There are two independent questions here:    (010) 1. The historical or hermeneutic question of what exactly Tarski, Quine, or Montague intended.    (011) 2. The question of whether it is useful to make a distinction between models and what they are intended to model.    (012) I'm sorry that I raised question #1 in my previous note, because the important issue, in my opinion, is #2.    (013) The diagram I use to illustrate the distinction is the attached mthworl2.gif. On the left is a representation of the world in a picture that suggests its complexity. On the right are some formulas of some theory. In the middle is a Tarski-style model represented as a graph.    (014) The point I emphasize is that model theory evaluates the formulas of a theory in terms of a model to determine a value T or F for each formula. But the question of degree of approximation is best considered in terms of how accurately the model corresponds to that aspect of reality it is intended to characterize.    (015) When I show that diagram to various people who know logic and model theory, I get two sharply polarized reactions. Some immediately say "Of course, that's obvious." But others get angry and say that I am misrepresenting logic, or model theory, or analytic philosophy.    (016) The point I make is that the right side of the diagram involves logic, which by itself is independent of any application until we try to apply it. The left side involves an application, which gets into an enormous number of issues that are outside the realm of pure logic and address philosophy of science, engineering, experimental error, and practical problems of all kinds.    (017) I believe it's important to make that distinction, and this diagram (or something else along those lines) helps to clarify the issues.    (018) John    (019) (Embedded image moved to file: pic26264.gif) _________________________________________________________________ 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    (020) ``` pic26264.gif Description: GIF image ``` _________________________________________________________________ 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    (01) ```
 Current Thread Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, (continued) Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, John F. Sowa Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, John F. Sowa Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Charles D Turnitsa <= Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, John F. Sowa Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Pat Hayes Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, John F. Sowa Message not availableMessage not availableMessage not availableRe: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, paola . dimaio Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Adrian Walker Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, paola . dimaio Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, John F. Sowa Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, paola . dimaio Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, Jack Park Re: [ontolog-forum] Visual Complexity, paola . dimaio