Rather than discussing the philosophical and theoretical significance of
undefined terms, I would suggest that the proponents of Category Theory
for knowledge engineering identify the aspect(s) of category theory for
which they see a specific use in knowledge engineering. Otherwise the
discussion is pointless. (01)
Now, to that end, Len Yabloko wrote: (02)
> There is no reliable way in classical Logic to establish and confirm
> the identity of any object outside of specific context. (03)
There is no universal reference scheme for 'thing' in terms of
properties. The presumption of classical logic is that terms that
denote 'things' in the UoD do just that. The presumption that distinct
terms denote different 'things' is an axiom, which a given theory may or
may not include. (04)
> CT, on the other hand, includes identity in the very definition of object. (05)
Citation please. This sentence means nothing to me. (06)
But identity is an interesting problem in logical theories, and it is
possible that this bit of the discussion is actually going somewhere. (07)
-Ed (08)
--
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 (09)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (011)
|