[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Two ontologies that are inconsistent but both needed

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Cassidy, Patrick J." <pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:31:13 -0400
Message-id: <6ACD6742E291AF459206FFF2897764BE019B92C8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Pat H -
   Could you explain the logical factors that prevent one from equating
a zero-length time slice of a 4-D object to a 3-D object?  It appears
that that is what you were saying:    (01)

> Just as 3-d entities have 2-d surface and sections, these things have    (02)

> 3-d 'surfaces' and 'sections'. A 3-d section of one of them is an 
> instantaneous snapshot of it, a freezing of it at a moment in time. 
> (If that moment is understood to be 'the present', then at that 
> present time, this section is very similar to a continuant, although 
> it cannot actually be the continuant for essentially logical 
> reasons.)    (03)

 . . . But I haven't seen the arguments for that.    (04)

PatC    (05)

Patrick Cassidy
260 Industrial Way West
Eatontown NJ 07724
Eatontown: 732-578-6340
Cell: 908-565-4053
pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx    (06)

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    (07)

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