[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Disaster Management ontology BOF in Delft

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:59:04 -0400
Message-id: <4669B508.6080903@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Azamat,    (01)

Those three statements are completely consistent:    (02)

  1. ...there must be a complete and consistent description of the
     entire universe for all time.    (03)

  2. Instead of striving for a global consistency of everything, it
     might be better to adopt methods that don't require global
     consistency.    (04)

  3. The kind of higher level of abstraction I would recommend would
     be a metalevel ontology that can relate different ontologies
     and generate new categories to extend an ontology as needed.    (05)

Point #1 is a statement that omniscience is possible for an infinite
mind, such as God's.  It is a paraphrase of a similar point by Leibniz.    (06)

Point #2 is a recognition that none of us are God.  Therefore, we must
make do with less ambitious methods that do not require omniscience.
In a similar vein, Leibniz said that no finite mind (such as the mind
of any human) can ever fully explore all the aspects of any empirical
study.    (07)

Point #3 is a recommended strategy for making incremental improvements
to our limited methods.  It won't let us achieve #1 in any finite time,
but it might help us extend and relate our limited views.    (08)

John    (09)

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    (010)

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