On Feb 12, 2009, at 1:46 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> (01)
> PH> And aren't we, in this forum, talking about logics (in a
>> broad sense, ie formalisms for description) and KR, rather
>> than statistics or metaphysics?
>
> The study of ontology is usually considered a subset of and
> sometimes nearly identical to metaphysics (02)
I actually strongly disagree with this (and think that this error is
the cause of a great deal of wasted effort and time in this very
forum), but let us argue about that topic on another thread. (03)
> , and logic is quite
> capable of representing any kind of mathematical statement,
> including statistical statements. (04)
Of course. But my remark was in the context of a disagreement about
the received meaning of "Extensional", and referred to which
disciplinary tradition was the one most appropriate for discourse in
this forum. (05)
Pat (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)
|