Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class

["Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris

 

You're trying to apply the terminology of English grammar

to mKR, and it doesn't fit.  Let me try to give you an

intuitive sense of the mKR terminology.  Also, you could

read Rand's "Intro. to Objectivist Epistemology" for a lot

more detail.

 

"attribute" is a static property of a single existent.

If the existent is a person, this would correspond to

an English adjective.  If the existent is an action,

the attribute would correspond to an English adverb.

Attributes do not change form for any reason -- the

same word is used in all contexts.  For example,

"happy" is always used -- never "happiness"

 

 

"action" is a dynamic property of a single entity.

It is a concept of change -- usually in both space

and time.  I idealize an action as having a beginning

and ending, and a space-time extent in between.

The optional prepositional phrases that apply to

actions (and commands and methods) are

	out  action products
	of   action domains
	with action characteristics
	od   action direct objects
	from action initial characteristics
	to   action final characteristics

Actions don't change form for any reason.

"walk" is always used -- never "walks", "walked", "walking".

Some Spanish-English comparisons that stick in my mind are

    Yo tengo hambre/sed/sueno/frio.

    I am hungry/thirsty/tired/cold.

 

Dick McCullough
Ayn Rand do speak od mKR done;
mKE do enhance od Real Intelligence done;
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;
http://mKRmKE.org/

----- Original Message -----

From: "Chris Menzel" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 3:23 PM

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class

> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
>> 
Chris
>>
>> mKE, the program which implements mKR, enhances 
intelligence
>> by assisting a human in creating/updating/searching 
knowledge
>> bases.
>>
>> mKR is integrating syntax 
and semantics without ambiguity.
>>
>> John has happy;  
implies that "happy" is an attribute.
> 
> But "happy" is not an 
attribute (unless you are using the word
> "attribute" idiosyncratically); 
it is an adjective.  Intuitively, it
> *expresses* an 
attribute.  But you have no semantics, so there's no
> telling what 
you have in mind by an attribute with any precision.
> 
>> I do 
walk done;  implies that "walk" is an action
> 
> "walk" a 
verb.  And what is an action?
> 
>>        "done" is useful because 
"walk" may be followed
>>        by 
many optional prepositional phrases.
> 
> I'm not sure why that 
makes it particularly useful.  You can achieve all
> the same effects 
in any of several more standard ways.  Have you studied
> other KR 
languages to see how similar things are done?
> 
>> 
P.S.
>> Spanish, and several other non-English languages,
>> 
use "has" for attributes instead of "is".
> 
> I'm not certain what 
you mean by saying they use "has" for attributes,
> but I'm guessing you 
mean that they use it for the *attribution* of
> properties to 
individuals.  That is so, but they do not use it *instead
> of* 
"is".  Spanish works pretty much like English here in the use of 
the
> so-called "is" of attribution -- "John is happy" is translated as 
"John
> es feliz", "es", of course, being the third person conjugation of 
"ser",
> "to be".  However, as in English (and most western 
languages), one can
> use "has" to attribute a property to an individual 
by using an
> adjectival nominalization, that is, the nominal form of an 
adjective.
> Thus, in English, we can say (somewhat awkwardly) "John has 
happiness".
> And in Spanish (I think -- very rusty here), "John tiene 
felicidad".
> But the grammar of these two forms of attribution is quite 
different and
> the use of "has" for attribution is rather stilted and 
uncommon.  There
> is a fairly extensive body of literature on this 
and related topics in
> linguistics and logic that I can point you to if 
you are interested.
> 
>> "done" is used in many modern 
programming languages.
> 
> So I've heard. ;-)
> 
> 
-chris
> 
> 
_________________________________________________________________
> 
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
> 
> 
>
_________________________________________________________________
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)