OK, this has been an interesting thread. I've come to agree with the
notion that at some point, occurrents and continuants merge. Amen. I
suppose at the sub atomic level, everything pretty much looks like an
occurrent and at the level of the universe an awful lot of things look
like continuants. (01)
Down here in the trenches, trying to explain such matters to the
"normal" folks who are the users of the ontologies I build is not a
productive use of time for me. I will count on Pat and company being
able to manage the translation if and (hopefully) when needed. (02)
I find it curious that the more focused this group is on having a
logically consistent solution that yields mathematically precise
answers, the more I am thinking that a really 'smart' system would tell
me that with imperfect (and often downright misleading) data that it
reasons why a particular event occurs when and how it does, and learns
with each iteration. Since the data will never be complete or without
suspicion, only the accumulation of experience over time would dampen
this mythical system's musings. What's the bridge from the precise to
the fuzzy? From the I know and can prove it to I think it's so
because... (03)
For Kathy: please let me know when you come upon that well-designed
probabilistic ontology, I'd really like to see it. (04)
Don Conklin
Lockheed Martin
Information Systems & Global Services
7021 Harbour View Blvd, Suite 105
Suffolk, VA 23435
757-935-9581 Office
757-935-9563 Fax (05)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:30 PM
To: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey
Cc: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Two ontologies that are inconsistent but
both needed (06)
>Barry and Pat,
>
>> >>> I just choose (like driving on the left). I choose to
distinguish
>>>>>between continuants and occurrents.
>>>>
>>>>Fine. But then the question arises as to whether your ontological
>>>>framework, which requires this distinction, is of more use than a
>>>>similar one which does not.
>>>
>>>I think we need to test this empirically. So far we are winning --
>> >the GO is, by several measures,the world's most successful
ontology.
>>
>>Ah, that is more like it. I agree you are winning. And it is
>>refreshing to see philosophical arguments replaced by straightforward
>>appeals to power and funding. As I have no funds to compete with, you
>>will no doubt go on winning :-)
>
>I hope you boys have fun slugging it out on the playground. :-) (07)
Yeh, Im sorry about the slightly bilious tone there. I suffer from
philosophy reflux syndrome. (08)
> In
>the meantime, people are going to build ontologies, and they are
>going to look to us for leadership on how to do it. Barry's legions
>are busy building them with continuants and occurants. Pat doesn't
>have any funding, he says. So he can't amass legions who will build
>ontologies with spatiotemporal processes. Alas. But no doubt
>someone will read his posts, and with dreams of matching Barry's
>glory, start amassing armies to build them with spatiotemporal
>processes. Then, some day, somebody is going to have an urgently
>important problem that requires these ontologies to interoperate. (09)
I don't think that will be much of a problem, most of the time.
Translating from c/o to spatiotemporal is really not much more than
judicious deletion. Translating in the other direction will require
some pattern-recognition to 'see' c- and o-type formulations, and
maybe in some cases splitting a concept into a continuant and its
lifetime (which are identified in spatiotemporal). (010)
I would say, in passing, that my views on this issue have been
informed in large part by trying to create useful interoperation
between a number of different ontologies. (011)
Pat
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (013)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (014)
|