Let me amend/expand my statement. (01)
> RHM> I don't believe John or Pat have come to grips with the
> > meaning of symbols in any natural language, e.g., English. (02)
I think your Conceptual Graph work in the 1980s was outstanding.
It was one of the few things in the AI field that I really admired.
I also like your "Knowledge Representation" book. (03)
I'm not as familar with your work, but I applaud your efforts
such as the Naive Physics essay. I don't like your approach
to Semantics. (04)
John & Pat
Today, I think you have gone astray.
Your focus on "possible worlds" has prevented you from grasping
the true meaning of words, which is derived from sensory perception
of things in the real world. (05)
Let me emphasize that this is not a personal attack.
I like you both as persons, and admire some of the work that you have done.
But I think that your current approach to Semantics is just plain wrong.
I know that your approach is considered standard practice by many people.
But I do not endorse it. I do not consider it appropriate for natural
I do not consider it appropriate for mKR. (06)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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 (08)