Denise, (01)
''A common world model'', or a single global ontology, is a necessary and
sufficient condition of powerful intelligent systems.
For it codifies the unifying principles of all existences, material and
mental, biological and social, physical and virtual, looking for an ultimate
unity in all things of the world.
Due to your inherent knowledge of basic categories of things, like as a
hierarchy of ontological classes and distinctions, your mind has a capacity
to reason abstractly over the world, giving a single name to a multitude of
individual things, comprehending an infinite number of entities under a
single concept, notion or term, understanding a great variety of theories
and models within a single model of reality.
A global ontology has nothing to do with a single world view forcefully
imposed on you free mind, but rather a comprehensive and consistent
representation of dynamic, ever changing reality, integrating, aligning, all
valuable views, paradigms, models, theories, as well the particular
ontologies.
A fundamental ontology is not a matter of choice or discussion. It is an
essential constituent of any knowledge, human or machine-understandable, of
any reasoning, natural or artificial, of any language, natural or formal, of
any artefacts, physical or intelligent, and now can become an integral part
of emerging knowledge society technologies, like upcoming Intelligent Web. (02)
Best wishes,
Azamat (03)
----- Original Message -----
From: <dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture
and LinkedData (04)
> Azamat,
>
> I do not believe it is necessary to have a common world ontology in order
> to
> build an intelligent, semantic web. The more that I have monitored the
> discussions in Ontolog, the clearer it becomes to me that a common world
> ontology may possibly have the opposite result.
>
> Wouldn't assuming that there can be a single world ontology at the core of
> the
> semantic web mean that -- we all think alike, thinking alike is good,
> differences must always be resolved and harmonized, and that someone's
> view will
> always be less valued than anothers. From a simple innovation and
> creativity
> perspective, I'm not sure I want an intelligent, semantic web that behaves
> in
> this way. I think this type of semantic web would be very limiting in
> more ways
> than one!
>
> Rather than a single world ontology which would presume a single world
> view to
> some degree, I would rather be able to define what I mean by something and
> expect an intelligent agent to resolve the differences between what I mean
> and
> what you mean through iterative negotiation. To this end, more and more
> published ontologies - particularly domain ontologies - would get us to
> the
> semantic web faster than the endless discussions about a single world
> ontology.
>
> I apologize if my comments seem simplistic and primitive --
>
> Best regards,
> Denise
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (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)
|