John, Ed, Pat, etal (01)
Here's the viewpoint of another engineer. (02)
I have offered the world a new tool,
the mKR language, which effectively
simplifies English, and removes its ambiguity
by using genus-differentia definitions and
explicit contexts for every sentence. (03)
I am very happy with mKR.
I have successfully applied mKR in many areas,
from simple address books to epistemology.
And I did it with informal English paraphrases
as my standard of meaning. (04)
I am constantly challenged to prove the value
of mKR by producing a formal Model Theory
(possible worlds) for mKR. I may never get
around to doing that -- because it's not important
to me. Informal English paraphrases are the
best connection to the real world. (05)
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;
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Barkmeyer" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Reality and semantics. (07)
> John F. Sowa wrote:
>> Following are the points I would emphasize:
>> 1. The immense size and complexity of the universe and its
>> continuous variability in time and space make it impossible
>> for any discrete, finite set of labels (words or predicates)
>> to have a perfect, one-to-one mapping to all aspects of the
>> universe or even to some small chunk we are familiar with.
>> 2. Human systems for perception, action, and mental imagery
>> enable us to interact with the world more accurately than
>> we can characterize it in discrete words or predicates.
>> 3. Therefore, anything we can express in a discrete string of
>> symbols (in logic or natural language) will inevitably be
>> an approximation to some limited part of the universe for
>> the purpose of fulfilling some particular narrow goal.
> Unsurprisingly, we are all in violent agreement. And the apparent
> discord was a consequence of the language used to express the model.
> Who would have thunk it? ;-)
>> 4. Natural languages have evolved under those constraints for
>> thousands of years, and they have proved to be amazingly
>> successful and flexible in adapting to an open-ended variety
>> of situations while enabling us to communicate enough of our
>> thoughts with sufficient accuracy to achieve specific goals.
> Or with sufficient ambiguity to confuse our peers, as John managed to do
> with his earlier email.
> As to the rest of John's posting, I refuse to be drawn into a discussion
> of the power of either mathematics or logic. I am an engineer. "By
> their fruits shall ye know them."
> Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
> 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/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)