[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Reality Oriented Logic -- Discussion

To: Ontolog <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arisbe <arisbe@xxxxxxxxxx>, Inquiry <inquiry@xxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 08:52:41 -0400
Message-id: <46BDB119.CA541021@xxxxxxx>
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o    (01)

ROL.  Discussion Note 3    (02)

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o    (03)

I'm not saying that I'll paste it on my wall,
or gif or png or svg it and make a screen-saver
of it, not just yet, but I would like the snap
this pic -- "Three Ships Passing In The Night"
seems like it'd make a good caption, Captain,
for when I get more time to reflect on it.    (04)

Over and out ...    (05)

Jon Awbrey    (06)

CC: Arisbe List, Inquiry List, Ontolog Forum    (07)

AA = Azamat Abdoullaev
CM = Chris Menzel
PH = Pat Hayes    (08)

AA: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-08/msg00256.html
PH: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-08/msg00261.html
CM: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-08/msg00276.html    (09)

AA: There are generally two types of logics:
    Content-oriented and Form-oriented,
    as much as two kinds of semantics:
    reality-centered and just so-called
    formal semantics.    (010)

AA: The first one is reality-driven logic based on
    ontological axioms and assumptions, where the
    universe of discourse is the world, its kinds,
    levels, pieces, fragments.    (011)

AA: The second one, more familiar here on this forum, is
    nonreality oriented logic based on formal assumptions,
    where the universe of discourse is logical objects and
    processes.  Although it may refer to anything, such logic
    represents nothing but the structure of human thought and
    knowledge.    (012)

PH: I could not disagree more.  This passage is full
    of basic misunderstandings.  Formal semantics means
    semantics done formally, not a semantics of something
    'unreal' because it is 'formal' in nature.  The universe
    of discourse of a (formal) logic, according to the usual
    (formal) semantics, is not "logical objects and processes"
    (whatever they are) but is some set of things.  Any set of
    things will do, and they can be abstract, imaginary, real or
    concrete.  The theory is completely agnostic concerning the
    nature of these things in the universe.  They are not required
    to be "constructs".  They are not restricted to things that are
    "logical" in nature.  Nothing in any part of the metatheory,
    semantics, philosophy, engineering or history of modern logic
    even slightly suggests that logics do not apply to reasoning
    about entities in the real world.  All logic [*] is 'reality
    oriented', although it might be better to say 'reality
    orientable'.    (013)

CM: I know I'm not the best person to make this recommendation,
    but everyone ought to print off the above quote and hang it
    over their desks. :-)    (014)

CM: The idea that formal logic is somehow about "formal objects"
    and is at best only loosely connected to the real world is
    a persistent canard that is utterly unhinged from the actual
    history of the subject -- ancient (Aristotle invented formal
    logic, after all) no less than modern.    (015)

inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
¢iare: http://www.centiare.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey
zhongwen wp: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=398
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o    (016)

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    (017)

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