Paola:
That fits very well, yes. I was thinking, for example, of the Greek
concept of Agora: there are no defined boundaries in 3-D space, but “you
know one when you see one”. Interestingly (at least for us, I think!),
agora was not just understood as a meeting place but any intersection, be it physical
such as a crossroads; or metaphorical, such as a “meeting of minds”
or agreement on a set of concepts…
In our discussions in OASIS a couple of years ago on developing
the Reference Model for Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), we had a similar
experience when considering the concept of “service” as being a
dimensionless interface between a provider’s “capability” and
a consumer’s requirement: you might not be able to measure it (except
indirectly by the real-world effects that it produces) but it is nonetheless
there.
By the way, what is then ‘Ma’, as this is not
defined in the quotation you made?
Regards,
Peter
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: 21 September 2007 09:36
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] entity: nothing
yes
In Knowledge Management we call that 'BA', and MA
Below a snippet of an essay I wrote last year with more references
The question is: in ontology, how do we represent that space
and if we don't - are our models of reality missing some important perspective?
quote
In western logic, boundaries - i.e. what separates – are
necessary to make systems work. In Eastern logic however, a lot of importance is
attached to the connecting space between entities that is considered essential
for closed systems to expand.
Takahiko Nomura, in his paper 'Design of 'Ba'
for successful knowledge management: how enterprises should design the places
of interaction to gain competitive advantage' introduced a framework, based on
the study results of practical benchmarking and assessment of Knowledge
Management, for designing 'Ba' where creative interaction is generated.
Ba is a Japanese word meaning 'space', and in Knowledge
Management is used to indicate a 'shared context in motion where knowledge is
created, shared and used' (Nonaka, Toyama, and Konno, 2000).
Originally used as a philosophy
concept (Nishida, Shimizu), in classical and modern Japanese thinking ba is understood
as a principle containing all the qualities necessary for knowledge creation.
unquote
On 9/21/07, Peter F Brown <peter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In Christopher Alexander's
seminal work on architecture "A Timeless way of Building" (and whose
work on developing "design patterns" led to the later take up of a
derived paradigm for computing modelling), he argued very much that
architecture was about the "forms we build around empty spaces" (not
sure if it's the exact quote) - in other words we architect physical building
around defined and bounded empty spaces - it is the spaces, the
"holes" if you will, that determine architecture's driving force, not
the other way around, thus not the physical construction per se....
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
] On Behalf Of paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: 20 September 2007 17:00
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] entity: nothing
Pat
just speculating a little on the points above and not trying to lead
anywhere specific
for a moment
following the observation on the erosion of the coast
rather than defining a hole from what's around it, maybe its the contrary
its what we are looking at, perhaps, that is defined by the space around it?
also, if Ontology is based on Aristotle's categories, then
which category does antimatter fit?
PDM
On 9/20/07, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
> >Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C7FAFF.A42BF83F"
> >
> >A hole is not the same as a ³nothing² there
> >are two separate threads in this discussion: are
> >we not talking about two different ³things² (I
> >use the word advisedly and very cautiously)?
> >
>
> Quite. Im really not sure what the 'nothing' term
> is supposed to indicate. Early set theorists
> wrestled with this concept for a while before
> they came up with the empty set. Perhaps
> 'nothing' is the empty set?
>
> Regarding boundaries, I made a stab at
> ontologizing these (at least the spatial/physical
> kind) a while ago. Things get quite complicated
> quite quickly. For example, if the surface of a
> solid object is a boundary of it, then where
> exactly is the liquid when that surface is wet?
> It seemed necessary to introduce the notion of a
> 'layer' on each side of the boundary.
> Goegraphical boundaries are even more difficult:
> one has to distinguish physical from notional
> boundaries, for example (when the coastline
> erodes, does the country or the county get
> smaller?)
>
> Pat
>
> >Peter B
> >From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
]
> >On Behalf Of Deborah MacPherson
> >Sent: 18 September 2007 20:01
> >To: [ontolog-forum]
> >Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] entity: nothing
> >
> >Hi Paola -
> >
> >The Cage analogy came around to silence being
> >able to be bounded by sound. Carved sculptures
> >take away unwanted material until only the
> >essential parts remain. In museum design certain
> >content is not ready to be named but it can be
> >classified, subject areas yet to be defined are
> >left as blank, un-labeled placeholders
> >allocating space, hoping future requirements
> >will fit without rearranging everything again.
> >
> >More to your point surely is John's statement
> >"more like a boundary than pure nothingness". So
> >with the stretched metaphors above.....What do
> >you think needs to be bounded? What are opposite
> >each other inside and outside the boundaries?
> >What could possibly be consistent across a range
> >of ontologies? What existing communication
> >system like OWL, or ___, or ___, or ___ is best
> >suited to indicating a boundary? How do you know
> >when you encounter a boundary? Simply won't
> >process? How do you "see" the holes and can you
> >measure how big or small they are?
> >
> >Deborah
> >On 9/18/07,
> ><mailto:paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx> paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
> ><<mailto:paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx >
> >wrote:
> >I am not entirely sure that we have not yet answered this, I may have
> >missed somethin
> >
> >Following the discussion on holes, the one questrion that I am left
> >with is whether
> >holes are entities as such, or non entities and
> >
> >if so
> >whether they would belong to a ' class of nothing' being
> >proposed/discussed somewhere earlier on this forum
> >
> >It looks to me that they are non entity cause they dont have a mass
> >that can be measured
> >I mean an entity is determined by its attributes and properties while
> >the only property of a hole that we can say is 'absence of energy'
> >
> >This is an attempt to bring the hole discussion into the focus of
> >current ontological question
> >
> >apologies if this is trivial
> >
> >
> >--
> >Paola Di Maio
> >School of IT
> >< http://www.mfu.ac.th>www.mfu.ac.th
> >*********************************************
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Message Archives:
> ><http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> >Subscribe/Config:
> ><http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/>
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> >Unsubscribe:
> >mailto:<mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Shared Files: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> >Community Wiki:
> <http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/>http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> >To Post:
> >mailto:<mailto: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>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
> >
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC (850)434
8903 or (650)494 3973 home
> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>
Pensacola
(850)202 4440 fax
> FL
32502 (850)291
0667 cell
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
*********************************************
_________________________________________________________________
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
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
*********************************************