Re: [ontolog-forum] mKR (was Thing and Class)

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

Rob

 

I think I've missed some of the thread here,

but I wanted to comment on the Soames' paper.

I read the paper, and have two main comments.

 

1. At the very end, I think he is touching on the

right approach.  Namely, that meaning is

grounded in human perception. 

The starting point is the perceptions and

thinking of a single person.

 

2. I think the beginning and middle parts of his

paper are looking at less fundamental aspects of meaning.

Namely, shared meaning in communication between people.

A person must have a meaningful sentence in mind,

before  communicating it to another person.

 

Adding my own thoughts.

3. The meaning of a sentence depends on the context

of the thinker/speaker -- all of the pertinent knowledge

accumulated prior to the sentence.

 

4. Where does the mKR language fit into this picture?

mKR explicitly states/names the context which is implicit

in the mind of the thinker/speaker.

 

5. The thinker/speaker perceptions are specific examples of

 

    entity has characteristic;

 

which ground the context of the thinker/speaker.

 

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: "Rob Freeman" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

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

Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2008 6:46 AM

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] mKR (was Thing and Class)

> Chris,
> 
> Re. "pitfalls": see earlier posts by 
me rejecting pointless arguments
> over the meaning of words.
> 
> Choose your own meaning for "pitfall" or "sense" if you wish. I see 
no
> reason to argue about them.
> 
> More narrowly note my 
comments were in response to Rich's reference to:
> 
> http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~soames/forthcoming_papers/Truth_and_Meaning.pdf
> 
> The quote from Geoff Sampson supports a 
different approach to the
> interpretation of language. I give it because 
others may be unfamiliar
> with it.
> 
> 
-Rob
_________________________________________________________________
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)