On Wednesday, January 02, 2008 7:46 PM, John Sowa wrote:
''
Classifications are not site dependent, but task dependent. ...Something as
simple as water, for example, can be classified in
an enormous number of ways.'' (01)
John,
A great example and good answer, but not all correct. (02)
The classifications are task (or purpose, utility, need) dependent mostly
for artifacts, while for the natural kinds (physical, chemical, biological),
they are to be performed by their nature, composition, structure, properties
and relationships. (03)
Extending your good example of water. As far as the true meaning of any
construct (concept, predicate, proposition, or theory) is always determined
by its real context (universe of discourse, setting, environment, possible
world, framework), the meaning boundaries used for 'water' are also to be
fixed by the context of use, which can be broadly divided as factual context
(natural sciences, history, economics, etc.) and formal context
(mathematics, logics, formal semantics). All to be underlied by a global
context of real ontology. (04)
In terms of economical uses, the dominant sense of water is the water supply
with certain quantity and quality requirements for human usage. Accordingly,
there are domestic waters (wells, tap water, toilet water, dishwater,
bathwater, garden irigation water, distilled water, potable water),
agricultural (dams), and industrial waters (water reservoirs, waste waters). (05)
In the geological (hydrological) context, it is equivalent to body of water,
water resources, naturally occurring water masses at the Earth surface,
fresh and salt: oceans and seas, ice caps and glaciers, ground waters, lakes
and rivers, water vapours and precipitation, and soil moisture, all making
up the hydrosphere moved by the hydrological cycle. (06)
In the physical context, the water is a kind of matter existing in gasous,
liquid and solid states, while in chemisty, it is a binary compound H2O
without color, taste and ordor, with characteristic freezing and boiling
temperature, viscosity, surface tension, solvent power. (07)
In the end of the day, the most esential meaning again comes from an
underlying ontological context, when ''water'' is defined as a kind of
substance composed of chemical elements hydrogen and oxygen, existing as a
gas, liquid or solid. Then, actually, water is not just H2O, but there exist
several natural kinds of water of the following combinations: H (H, D,
T,)2O(16O, 17O, 18O), like normal water, heavy water, D2O, T2O, HDO, etc. (08)
So, both meanings and its contexts find out its ultimate solutions within
the fundamental context of ontology, composed of of a universe of essential
statements (principal definitions, axioms, rules) S, a universe of key
categories (predicates) P, and a universe of real entities E and
relationships R: O = <S, P, E, R>. (09)
azamat abdoullaev (010)
PS: In a certain sense, PH's severe criticism of a formal context logic with
a view to construct ''the ontology of context'' (or better the context of
ontology) has its good grounds. (011)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] CL, CG, IKL and the relationship between
symbols in the logical "universe of discourse" and individuals in the "real
world" (012)
> Pat and Duane,
>
> Classifications are not site dependent, but task dependent.
>
> PH>> Hmm. But how can one and the same site have many
> >> different ontological classifications?
>
> DN> Sometimes it can have multiple representation terms
> > (*aka ISO 11179 - 3)
>
> DN> You may wish to read the OASIS Reference Model for Service
> > Oriented Architecture. Within the reference model is an
> > important aspect called "execution Context".
>
> That's a good example, but the variety of task-oriented
> differences in classification is all pervasive in every aspect
> of technology and everyday life.
>
> Something as simple as water, for example, can be classified in
> an enormous number of ways. Just consider its use for drinking,
> washing, cooking, cooling, flushing the toilet, watering the lawn,
> filling the swimming pool, serving as a chemical reagent (with
> what level of purity?), etc. And then consider ways of classifying
> it according to source and packaging: tap water, rain water, waste
> water, flowing water, stagnant water, distilled water, bottled water
> (from what source, what purity, what purpose?), etc.
>
> DN> however the concepts should be singular, no?
>
> What is your criterion of singularity? See the above examples
> of 'water'. Or take any word that seems to be univocal, such
> as 'automobile', and consider how its "meaning" has changed
> over the past 100 years. In 1908, 'automobile' was a synonym
> for 'horseless carriage', but today it refers to things whose
> inner workings a professional auto mechanic from 30 years ago
> would be at a loss in trying to repair. (Now, they don't even
> try to repair those things, and the "field replaceable units"
> keep getting bigger and bigger.)
>
> John Sowa
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (013)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (014)
|