Hi Rob (01)
A few comments noted below, prefixed with "*****". (02)
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/ (03)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Freeman" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "KR-language" <KR-language@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] mKR (was Thing and Class) (04)
> Hi Dick,
>
> There are various ways we can try to define meaning. Frankly I
> disagree with the one Soames addresses. I don't think the answer lies
> in "truth". My understanding is that there are big problems with
> determining the "truth" of many statements. Another interpretation for
> my reference to "pitfalls" in formal logic.
>
> So I don't like Soames solution. I was just glad to see the issue
> being addressed.
>
> I'm also not wild about the idea of grounding meaning in human
> perception. This says "embodiment" to me. I've even seen arguments
> that mathematics can only be understood if embodied!
***** You're dropping the context of knowledge. All knowledge is
***** created by humans, based on their perceptions.
>
> While I am sympathetic with embodiment as yet another form of the
> general movement away from theory, personally I think you can capture
> all you need of it in data-based approaches like that advocated by
> Chris Anderson (Axiomatic ontology thread.)
>
> Which is to say, I think the key is in the many different ways data
> can come together (c.f. Vitiello's many-body theory), not any
> particular set of data (embodiment.)
>
> More generally, I agree with you that "the meaning of a sentence
> depends on the context of the thinker/speaker". The problem with your
> mKR formalism is I just don't think you will be able to enumerate all
> these different "meanings", list all distinguishing cases, etc. To
> attempt to do so strikes me as a bit like trying to label all the
> patterns in a kaleidoscope (the "meaning" of each piece in all
> possible contexts of the others?)
***** I'm not looking at all possible cases ("possible worlds"),
***** only the particular case appropriate for a particular
***** sentence.
>
> Rather than defining new sets of labels as I understand your mKR to
> do, I think the way ahead will be to look at the different ways data
> can come together to generate new classes/concepts/"languages"
> spontaneously.
***** I don't know what "new sets of labels" means ???
>
> -Rob
>
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Richard H. McCullough
> <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 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/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> (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)
|