ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and

 To: "[ontolog-forum]" Waclaw Kusnierczyk Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:16:50 +0200 <46A7CBD2.3000007@xxxxxxxxxxx>
 ```John F. Sowa wrote: > Wacek, > > The question of how to or whether to represent a null value of > some kind is a context-dependent issue about how to regularize > the operators of some mathematical system. > > vQ> If you and me are just you and me, then nothing is nothing, > > no entity at all, and not the empty set. You can well > > interpret 'nothing' as a sheet of paper on which there is > > no drawing, though there is the sheet -- how do such > > interpretations help? > > The number 0, for example, simplifies the statements of many > arithmetic principles. Similarly, the empty set simplifies > many of the axioms of set theory. In lattices, the bottom > symbol simplifies many axioms. In a Boolean lattice, the > bottom corresponds to a proposition that is always false; > such a proposition doesn't say anything useful, but it makes > it possible to formulate the axioms more systematically. > > For some mathematical structures, a null value has no useful > role. In most versions of mereology, for example, there is > no empty part. An atom in mereology is defined to be something > that has no part other than itself. In such systems, the word > 'nothing' is just a way of saying 'no thing'. Unlike the empty > set, which is assumed to exist in set theory, the word 'nothing' > (or a formal symbol that represents it) would be a way of saying > "It is false that there exists an x such that..." > > In short, the concept of 'nothing' or a 'null value' depends > on the operations needed to regularize some system.    (01) No doubt here. I thought we were talking about ontology there, and interpreting 'nothing' as denoting the empty set (an entity in itself) does not seem correct to me. Of course, you may build a mathematical model of reality in which nothing is modelled as the empty set (and the empty set is modelled as the set composed of the empty set), and such a model may be used to interpret sentences containing the word 'nothing'.    (02) But I do not see how "''nothing'', or ''nonentity'' or ''nonbeing'', interpreted as the empty set, is another ontological category."    (03) vQ    (04) _________________________________________________________________ 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) ```