[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Interesting Category - Chindogu

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "David Whitten" <david.j.whitten@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:11:08 -0600
Message-id: <aa69e0940801181411o712c605fucc0ddbb19bf5620d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> At 3:17 PM -0600 1/14/08, David Whitten wrote:
> >There is an article at http://pingmag.jp/2008/01/11/chindougu/
> >about Chindogu. (also see:   http://www.chindogu.net/)
> >
> >The creator of the category (Kenji Kawakami of the
> >Chindogu Society of Japan) shares his design criteria
> >for these objects:
> >
> >Chindogu Ten Commandments
> >
> ># 1 A chindogu must not actually be used
> ># 2 It must have some function.
> ># 3 It must have an anarchic element.
> ># 4 It must be a tool for everyday life.
> ># 5 It must not actually be put on the market.
> ># 6 It must not be only for the purpose of humor.
> ># 7 It must not be for black humor.
> ># 8 "Dirty" jokes are forbidden.
> ># 9 It must not be for profit.
> >#10 It must be usable internationally.
> >
> >
> >This strikes me as a category that could appear in an ontology.
>    (01)

On Jan 15, 2008 10:13 AM, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:    (02)

> Really? Why? An ontology of what? And even if you are right, wouldn't
> it make more sense to focus for a while on more down-to-earth
> examples that would be some actual use?
>    (03)

One of the frustrating things about formally describing something in our
real-world experience is that the edges of the world are blurry, and generally
categories are never as crisp as our predicates.    (04)

For example, the Chindogu category might be a subcategory of a category
of useful devices,  on the understanding that requirement #2 could be formalized
in some logical fashion (#2 is "it must have some function".)    (05)

It is clear to me that a set of rules that are trying to delimit an
area of humour
could be very difficult to formalize, and as such, could be a topic of
benefit on
this mailing list.    (06)

I recall many years ago hearing the statement that the hardest things
to formalize
are those that are common to different working groups in a business or industry,
as each of the groups interacts with those common things regularly, and their
interactions shape what aspects of the things are most important to them, in
some sense robbing the thing from having a general definition and replacing it
with a very specific definition derived from the interactions.    (07)

As an example of this, look at the use of "patient" in a medical facility or
"oil well" in the petroleum industry.    (08)

Best Regards,
David    (09)

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    (010)

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