[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] What words mean

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rob Freeman" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:05:02 +0800
Message-id: <7616afbc0802132005v2dd25111nc72e71b56abe77b1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Feb 13, 2008 12:59 PM, Randall R Schulz <rschulz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Humpty Dumpty has no place in science, math and technology!    (01)

In the absence of a theory of meaning, what argument is left in this
thread seems to be mostly focused on the nature and process of
science.    (02)

For anyone who is really looking for new ideas in this thread, I want
to recommend Thomas Kuhn's ideas on the subject of science. He not
only has a refreshingly new perspective on what constitutes a science
(a consensus), he also has a very explanatory theory of meaning to
back up his conclusions (paradigm, in itself a reinterpretation of the
old Greek word for "example"?)    (03)

This passage might summarize some of his views on the process of science:    (04)

Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions p.g. 103:    (05)

"...the reception of a new paradigm often necessitates a redefinition
of the corresponding science. Some old problems may be relegated to
another science or declared entirely "unscientific." Others that were
previously non-existent or trivial may, with a new paradigm, become
the very archetypes of significant scientific achievement. And as the
problems change, so, often, does the standard that distinguishes a
real scientific solution from a mere metaphysical speculation,
wordgame, or mathematical play. The normal-scientific tradition that
emerges from a scientific revolution is not only incompatible but
often actually incommensurable with that which has gone before."    (06)

This might be a good summary of his theory of meaning:    (07)

p.g. 192 (Postscript)
"When I speak of knowledge embedded in shared exemplars, I am not
referring to a mode of knowing that is less systematic or less
analyzable than knowledge embedded in rules, laws, or criteria of
identification. Instead I have in mind a manner of knowing which is
misconstrued if reconstructed in terms of rules that are first
abstracted from exemplars and thereafter function in their stead."    (08)

-Rob    (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>