ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Interoperability - its natural basis

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Ronald Stamper <stamper.measur@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:16:12 +0000
Message-id: <BC7C6AE0-A2D3-4A45-A712-11A3BAA09300@xxxxxxxxx>
Dear All,    (01)

I do apologise - my amateurish website seems to have vanished.
I shall rectify this as soon as I am able.    (02)

John Sowa:
I shall  treasure Henry Kautz' poem.  Thank you.    (03)

Ronald Stamper    (04)


On 16 Mar 2009, at 06:37, John F. Sowa wrote:    (05)

> Ronald,
>
> I agree with your concerns.
>
> RS> 'Listening in' to the ontolog discussions I sense a widespread
>> belief that logic and formal  methods will solve the problems
>> ontology development.  That makes me uneasy about the direction
>> of some of the technically oriented work.
>
> I believe that logic is important, but I don't believe it is
> a panacea.  I like to quote the poem by Henry Kautz (copy below).
> Kautz also believed that logic was important, but he had enough
> sense to recognize that it was a tool rather than a solution.
>
> RS> I am all for formal precision once we are sure we have fully
>> grasped what we need to be formal and precise about.  I thought
>> that the age of logicism had closed by mid-20th century.
>
> But I also agree with Chris M. that the word 'logicism' should
> be avoided.  It has been used in so many vague ways that it
> no longer has any clear meaning by itself.
>
> RS> I have placed two papers on a very amateurish website:
>> www.rstamper.co.uk
>
> That gave me the message "We can't find the page you requested."
>
> John
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>
>         On Selecting a Thesis Topic
>
>                By Henry Kautz
>
>      If your thesis is utterly vacuous,
>      Use first-order predicate calculus.
>          With sufficient formality
>          The sheerist banality
>      Will be hailed by all as miraculous!
>
>      If your thesis is quite indefensible,
>      Reach for semantics intensional.
>          Over Montague grammar
>          Your committee will stammer
>      Not admitting it's incomprehensible.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>    (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)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>