[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer Cake

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: SW-forum <semantic-web@xxxxxx>
From: Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:00:09 -0700
Message-id: <C2D51B19.4E09%dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Referring of course to Ontology as the study of being.  I have not read
Goedel.    (01)

D    (02)

On 7/31/07 4:54 PM, "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:    (03)

> Peter:
> That jives with my beliefs, as crooked and warped as they may be.
> ;-)
> /d
> On 7/31/07 2:13 PM, "Peter F Brown" <peter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Duane:
>> You are right. This goes to the heart of the issue of "vicious circularity"
>> that Whitehead and Russell had thought was sorted with Principia Mathematica,
>> until Kurt Gödel came along and demolished their shiny, perfect, world. An
>> ontology is not just some self-referencing and self-sustaining model that is
>> somehow "complete"; it points out to the real world, as you rightly say.
>> Before there is a flame war on this, I should underline that we discussed
>> this
>> extensively at the Ontology Summit, and there was an (uncomfortable for some)
>> consensus that there is "Ontology" as *the* study of being; and there are
>> "ontologies" that are domain-specific encapsulations of some aspect of the
>> real world.
>> Peter
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull
>> Sent: 31 July 2007 16:05
>> To: [ontolog-forum]; John F. Sowa
>> Cc: 'SW-forum'
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer Cake
>> On 7/31/07 12:46 PM, "Azamat" <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The real semantics or meanings of any symbolism or notation is defined by
>>> ontology; for this is the only knowledge domain studying the Being of
>>> Everything which is, happens and relates.
>> Not trying to start a nit picky argument, but I had always thought that real
>> semantics are defined by how a term is used and what it is linked to in a
>> physical world (which of course can be captured and expressed in an
>> ontology).  Otherwise any ontology is just a huge circular reference (like
>> the english dictionary when void of any grounding.
>> How can one define and convey the true meaning of spicy food, heat, pain etc
>> without the corresponding grounding experience?
>> Duane     (04)

"Speaking only for myself"
Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com
Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com
My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury
MAX 2007 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/07/adobe-max-2007.html
**********************************************************************    (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)

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