On May 4, 2008, at 8:57 AM, Ryan Kohl wrote:
> Christopher Menzel wrote:
>>
>> I have to say, I find the the "spatiotemporal existence" condition in
>> a definition of "universal" utterly baffling. Why build such a
>> strong
>> philosophical prejudice into the entire framework from the git-go?
>> Barry and Pierre, are you *that* certain of your insight into
>> reality's Ultimate Nature?
>>
>
> It doesn't have to be a matter of certainty as much as clarity. (01)
Yes, well put. In my defense, I was responding with reference to the
overtly realist flag that Barry and Werner like to fly. But the
better question would have been what possible theoretical or practical
benefit could accrue from adding the condition in question. (02)
> If I had to choose, I'd prefer a well-defined ontology I had
> problems with to a barely-defined ontology that I could interpret to
> taste. Of course, I agree that in the crowded upper ontology
> marketplace, such a definition of 'universal' would need a stellar
> ad campaign. (03)
Indeed! (04)
-chris (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|