[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology, Information Models and the 'Real World': C

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Waclaw Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:06:46 +0200
Message-id: <4661A3A6.2070004@xxxxxxxxxxx>
KCliffer@xxxxxxx wrote:
> I'm not sure I'm getting all the depth and subtleties, but will raise a 
> possibly pertinent point - if it's not pertinent, please advise - the 
> point is embedded in Waclaw's part of the following:
> Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>     Pat Hayes wrote:
>      >> And, I guess,
>      >>
>      >> "the 'continuous present' indicated by the English 'ing' ending,
>     as in
>      >> It is raining, means that the proposition 'rains' is true throughout
>      >> some interval containing 'now'" [IKL guide]
>      >>
>      >> should be read as
>      >>
>      >> "the 'continuous present' indicated by the English 'ing' ending,
>     as in
>      >> It is raining, means that the false proposition 'rains' stands
>     in the
>      >> ist relation to some interval containing 'now'"?
>      >
>      > Why do you assume that 'rains' is logically false? I have no idea
>     what
>      > its actual logical truth-value is;
>     because I take
>     (that (rains))
>     to be a proposition that it rains, without any indexicals, that is,
>     that
>     it rains everywhere, at all times.  Or how should it be understood?
> It could be understood as "rain happens" (i.e. it rains somewhere 
> sometimes, in general), rather than it rains everywhere, at all times. 
> Either is a reasonable interpretation of the English statement, 
> depending on ... gulp ... context or ... (not gulp?) ... intent. And I 
> think it's still without any indexicals (?). In the same sense, "Pat 
> sleeps" could be understood as "Pat sleeps sometimes", rather than "Pat 
> sleeps all the time". Either of these alternative interpretations would 
> be true, not false, in an unequivocal "universal" sense. In fact, the 
> more general interpretations (somewhere, sometimes) may even lend 
> themselves better to contextual specification or relation about when and 
> where.    (01)

Yes, that's a reasonable reading.  So let (sleeps pat) mean that pat 
sleeps sometimes.  What does 'sometimes' mean?  If it means at some time 
during the whole history of the world, then this proposition (one that 
Pat sleeps sometimes) is different from the proposition which would 
correspond to the 'pat sleeps sometimes' meaning of (sleeps pat) if 
'sometimes' means, e.g., at some time during the life of Pat.    (02)

Both propositions are just false or just true (say, both are true).
Both are false (or true) at any interval, whether Pat is sleeping or not 
during that interval.  And (ist int (sleeps pat)) does not mean that the 
proposition that Pat sleeps sometimes (whatever sometimes has been fixed 
to mean) is true;  ist says nothing about the truth of the proposition.    (03)

My point is independent on how, in the sense of quantification, for 
example, you wish to read (sleeps pat).    (04)

vQ    (05)

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    (06)

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