To: | "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:18:01 -0600 |
Message-id: | <p06230905c3b46834970f@[192.168.1.2]> |
At 4:32 PM -0500 1/16/08, Deborah MacPherson wrote:
RE: ......is there any kind of thing that could NOT be a context, or part of a context, in this third sense? Or can a context be anything, or perhaps any set of any things? If (as I suspect) the latter, then this is not a definition of anything, as it does not identify any actual category. - Pat Hayes Hi Pat, can you please explain why the identification of an actual category is the ultimate or preferred result of well-defined context (whether words or "any collection of things"). Not sure I understand the question. The identification of a
category is what a definition does. The category in question is
"context".
Heres my point, let me illustrate it with a parable. Joe comes
along and says, we need to discuss foodles. Its important to have a
general theory of foodles. And I say, hmm, what are foodles? And Joe
says, everything is a foodle.
At this point, I conclude that what Joe wants is impossible,
because there isn't anything useful to be said that applies to
everything. Anything non-trivial will be true of some things and
false of others: it will divide the universe into examples and
non-examples. It will be a category.
Do you see the point?
Pat
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC 40 South Alcaniz St. Pensacola FL 32502 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 (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Scheduling a Discussion [was: CL, CG, IKL and the relationship between symbols in the logical "universe of discourse" and individuals in the "real world"], Christopher Menzel |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] (OT) German, John F. Sowa |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Scheduling a Discussion [was: CL, CG, IKL and the relationship between symbols in the logical "universe of discourse" and individuals in the "real world"], Deborah MacPherson |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Scheduling a Discussion [was: CL, CG, IKL and the relationship between symbols in the logical "universe of discourse" and individuals in the "real world"], John Black |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |