ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer pizza (was ckae)

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: leo@xxxxxx
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 17:04:45 +0600 (YEKST)
Message-id: <3517.10.0.2.224.1189335885.mgnwebinterface@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Colleagues,
Suppose your "performance" topic is only a particular case of common
"replication" part in the Autopoiesis of Maturana and Varela !
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin/homepage/notes/auto.html .
Suppose the new ontology activity must take into account this and the VSM
of Stafford Beer (look at his Preface to their book -
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~jwjhix/Beer.html ).    (01)

Leonid Ototsky - http://paterleo.wikispaces.com    (02)


> Dear Jay,
>
>> Actually, I wasn't being so bold as to advance any theses one way or
>> another - that's why I used quote marks :)  I was asking
>> questions because
>> it seems to me that this notion of a performance of 4:33 is
>> odd (vague) on
>> the face of it in various ways, and I wanted clarification of
>> what others
>> took it to be.
>
> MW: Well Chris and I agree about that part. What is special
> about a performance is its intentional nature.
>
>> Personally,  I suspect John Cage of trying to
>> mess with my
>> mind :)
>
> MW: Yes, well at least trying to make you think.
>>
>> Simon and Garfunkel wrote "The Sounds of Silence". I think
>> that at least
>> some folks are taking it that a performance of 4:33 is
>> intended to direct us
>> towards attending to silence?
>
> MW: I really recommend reading the reference I gave earlier:
> http://solomonsmusic.net/4min33se.htm
>
>> (Is that right? - Chris spoke
>> of 4:33 as a
>> limiting case of a musical rest.). Do we know that it's not
>> the intention of
>> the composer or performer to direct us to listen to ambient
>> sounds during a
>> performance? Do we know that these ambient sounds are not part of the
>> 'music' that we are supposed to attend to as well as
>> attending to silence?
>> (Jeffrey referred to John Cage 'music'. Is the point of
>> performing 4:33  an
>> attempt to direct us to reconsider what our definition of
>> music is? - Does
>> music have to be sound intentionally produced? What about an
>> accidental
>> bow-scrape? What about foot stomps during Flamenco? What about my own
>> foot-tappings?)   Are we even supposed to be attending  to
>> silence as well
>> as to sound? Or have I missed something about what a
>> performance of 4:33 is
>> supposed to be?
>
> MW: All questions I suspect John Cage was trying to ask with this
> peice.
>>
>> Ironically, my phone just rang. When I picked it up, there
>> was 'silence' on
>> the line, besides a background noise.Was someone trying to
>> call me or was it
>> a random computer glitch somewhere? This happens a lot more
>> these days than
>> it used to :) I guess this is an epistemological question, though.
>
> MW: Yes. There are companies who have automatic dialers, and when
> someone picks up, they try to connect you to one of their salesman.
> If they can't get one on the line within a few seconds, they (or you)
> hang up.
>>
>> Other questions which puzzle me:
>>
>> What if two performers announce simultaneous performances of
>> 4:33 on the
>> same stage and I don't hear one of the announcements? I
>> suppose that  I, in
>> the audience, only (hear?) attend to one of the performances?
>> But other
>> folks hear two performances? Is that right? Or does everyone hear one
>> performance?
>
> MW: I think there are two performances. (This is a bit like the
> sound of a tree falling when there is noone to hear it).
>>
>> What if a performance of 4:33 is broadcast on the radio, but
>> the transmitter
>> fails during the 4:33  broadcast. - does the radio audience
>> hear the whole
>> performance? (Someone else alluded to this, I think.)
>>
>> An orchestra can perform a Beethoven symphony without
>> announcing it first,
>> and then folks in the audience willl likely respond
>> affirmatively to the
>> question: did you hear a symphony just now? And maybe,
>> depending on the
>> audience, even to the question, did you hear a Beethoven
>> symphony just now?
>> But will folks in the audience of an unannounced performance
>> of 4:33 respond
>> affirmatively to the question: did you hear a performance of
>> 4:33 just now?
>> What's the difference in these cases? Or can one perform 4:33
>> unannounced?
>> (Chris spoke of 'an internal nod', though.)
>
> MW: The first performance was announced by the lid of the piano
> being raised or lowered at the beginning of the performance, and
> at the start of each movement and at the end.
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
> Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
> Registered in England and Wales
> Registered number: 621148
> Registered office: Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
> http://www.shell.com
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
>>
>> Also, is there a problem about (how you represent) the notion
>> of 'hearing
>> silence' (or of 'attending to silence')?  Since silence is
>> the absence of
>> sound?
>>
>> (iff ( hearsSilenceDuring (?X ?T) (not (exists ?Y) (and
>> (sound ?Y) (hears ?X
>> ?Y ?T))))
>>
>> ??? (A crude attempt)
>>
>> How are you supposed to formalize this stuff?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jay
>>
>> PS  Speaking of intentions:
>>
>> " Hello darkness, my old friend
>> I've come to talk with you again
>> Because a vision softly creeping
>> Left its seeds while I was sleeping
>> And the vision that was planted in my brain
>> Still remains
>> Within the sound of silence"
>>
>> Metaphor and simile, of course, and so off-limits to
>> formalization, as far
>> as I know. That's why I suspect Cage of messing with my mind.
>> He was an
>> artist after all :).
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 9:18 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer pizza
>> (was ckae)
>>
>>
>> > Dear Chris,
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > Your questions betray a radically extensionalist view of
>> >> music, Jay
>> >> > > -- you seem to be suggesting that a performance of
>> Cage's piece is
>> >> > > identical with any 4'33" interval of silence.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > What is the sound of one hand clapping?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Obviously you don't watch The Simpsons. :-)
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > "No entity without identity."
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Ah, confirmation of your extensionalism!
>> >> >
>> >> > What Jay had actually missed was the intentional nature of a
>> >> > performance.
>> >>
>> >> Er, uh...huh?  I chided Jay about his apparently
>> extensional view of
>> >> musical performances, i.e., the view that they are
>> identical with the
>> >> sound produced.
>> >
>> > MW: Well then perhaps I should be asking what you mean by
>> > extensionalism, since it seems to be different from my
>> understanding.
>> >
>> > MW: My understanding would be that under extensionalism, the
>> > identity of an object (that it is a distinct object) is
>> defined by its
>> > extension. So a performance of 4'33" is a particular piece
>> of space time
>> > including temporal parts of the performers and listeners and some
>> > instrument(s). It would not be any peice of silent 4'33", because it
>> > needs to be an intentional silent performance of 4'33" to
>> qualify. So
>> > I would see a category error in what you were criticising
>> as apparently
>> > extensionalist.
>> >
>> >> Obviously, what is missing from such a view are the
>> >> intentional elements of a performance (as I even illustrated; see
>> >> below).
>> >
>> > MW: Yes, we are agreed on this. It is the leap to a problem with
>> > xtensionalism that I do not follow.
>> >>
>> >> > (You may recall Leo pointing out the intentional nature of
>> >> > performance.)
>> >>
>> >> And you may recall my pointing out that musical
>> performances are not
>> >> extensional. ;-)
>> >
>> > MW: Well I would say that they were extensional, so clearly we mean
>> > something different. I'd like to know what you mean.
>> >>
>> >> > There is no performance of 4' 33" unless it is intended
>> to be. The
>> >> > intentional nature of performance is a key element of
>> its identity.
>> >>
>> >> *boggle*  In addition to registering my disagreement with an
>> >> extensional
>> >> view of musical performance, I paid explicit homage to the
>> intentional
>> >> in a passage you neglected to quote:
>> >>
>> >> > > Obviously [4'33"] begins at the beginning; given the
>> nature of the
>> >> > > piece it seems to me it begins when the performer gives
>> >> some sort of
>> >> > > internal nod and, of course, ends 4'33" later.
>> >>
>> >> > Extensionalism here is irrelevant, except that it allows
>> >> you to answer
>> >> > the question of how many performances there were in a
>> >> particular hall
>> >> > at a particular time based on the participation of the
>> >> performers and
>> >> > the audience.
>> >>
>> >> I think you need to re-read my post.  Our views of performance are
>> >> apparently quite similar.  Why you failed to see that is
>> >> rather baffling
>> >> to me.
>> >
>> > MW: I agree our views of performance are similar. I am baffled by
>> > what you mean by extensionalism.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Matthew West
>> > Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
>> > Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
>> > Registered in England and Wales
>> > Registered number: 621148
>> > Registered office: Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>> >
>> > Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
>> > Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
>> > http://www.shell.com
>> > http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>> >
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>    (03)



_________________________________________________________________
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    (04)

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