Frank, (01)
Machines also live in a tube. That's why we're here isn't it? I'm not
interested in how you or I understand the world, I am interested in how
a machine can simulate some understanding of the world, and that
involves crawling into a pretty small tube. (02)
I would recommend that you read some of what John has written on this
subject, as it will help clarify a lot of what we are and what we are
not talking about, as well as a comprehensive history of what's already
gone down that tube. That's something people can build on. At least then
when we talk about the specifics we all know we are talking about the
same subject. (03)
Mike (04)
FERENC KOVACS wrote:
> Dear John
>
> You see the world through a tube. There is a lot more out there in
> understanding this world and human language processing than trying to
> describe in terms of formal logic. In fact, you do not need a language
> to understand the world to a large extent. Moreover, you do not have
> to speak a language syntactically correctly to get by. You should
> understand that knowledge is an ordered acces to information and
> knowledge representations in natuaral languages are NOT accessible in
> an ordered fashion, not even the books in the libraries. Why not?
> Because they are morphologically sorted, that is alphabetical indexes
> are the search/keyword tools and no matter what you do about them in
> compiling thesaurii or ontologies you still have the same problem.
> You do not see that all the words you use are names of concepts, and
> concepts are all abstract, there is no such thing as an abstract
> concept and a concrete concept, etc. Knowledge is the level of
> failiarity with the mental operations and their results in nterms of
> objects, properties and relations, all concepts, all products of
> conceptualization by the mind, but not unambiguous, on the contrary,
> most of the time the have ambiguous senses and sometimes triples
> senses. You need to understand this, otherwise you never get out of
> your tunnel.
> What you try to achieve in formal languages and codi8ng is all lost in
> translation anyway.Your computer is in front of you, after compiling
> your program the machine code shows nothing of the efforts you have
> been making. All you get is an output and an input, but what goes on
> in the mind in between has certainly nothing to do with mapping,
> especially not in 2D or more Ds.
> Please, read the book entitled the Topos of Music, you will get a
> better understanding of what I am saying. (I would hate to recommend
> my writings or ideas to read now, and they are only available for
> perks, anyway. I am not a charity from now on. :-) )
> http://www.springer.com/birkhauser/mathematics/book/978-3-7643-5731-3
>
> Cheers, Frank
>
> Vasco and Frank,
>
> The problem of multiple senses for nearly all words in natural languages
> makes them informal. When NL words are inserted into formal languages
> (e.g., in controlled NLs such as Aristotle's syllogisms), the sense
> must be specified by some declaration or stipulation.
>
> JFS>> For example, following is the *form* of the pattern named Barbara:
> >>
> >> Every A is a B.
> >> Every B is a C.
> >> Therefore, every A is a C.
> >>
> >> When the letters A, B, and C are replaced by arbitrary common nouns,
> >> the interpretation of the syllogism is uniquely determined --
> >> provided that the middle term B is required to apply to exactly
> >> the same individuals in both premises.
>
> VCP> By saying "provided X" aren't we introducing background knowledge?
> > I.E aren't we considering background knowledge implicitly?
> >
> > In the absurd we could say
> >
> > "Every lightning rod is a conductor"
> > "Every conductor studied music"
> > "Therefore, every lightning rod studied music"
>
> The word 'conductor' has multiple word senses. In one sense, it means
> something that conducts electricity. In another sense, it means a
> person who conducts an orchestra. If the word sense can vary between
> premise #1 and premise #2, that introduces a fallacy called the
> 'nondistributed middle term' -- i.e., the word 'conductor' has
> different extensions in each premise.
>
> To solve this problem, the complete expression of the syllogism must
> include a declaration of word sense for each noun in the syllogism.
>
> VCP> Aren't we introducing the background knowledge of the word
> > 'lightning rod' in determining why this is false?
>
> There are two aspects to meaning: intension and extension. The
> intension of any statement is an abstract pattern. The extension
> is determined by matching that pattern to the domain (which may
> be some aspect of the world, an abstract model, or some possible
> world). The intension is determined when the pattern of the
> logic (in this case, the syllogism) is stated and each term of
> the syllogism is mapped to a unique definition (e.g., by stating
> the URI of some specification). The extension is determined by
> using the pattern and the URIs of each term to determine the
> truth value.
>
> FK> Your ontologies are a mess...
>
> I certainly agree that many of the things that are called
> "ontology" are a mess -- and they've been getting worse, not
> better, in the past ten years.
>
> John Sowa
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (05)
--
Mike Bennett
Director
Hypercube Ltd.
89 Worship Street
London EC2A 2BF
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
www.hypercube.co.uk
Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068 (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|