John (01)
I wish to make my position absolutely clear. (02)
I am a spaghetti man.
>From day one, I designed mKR as a philosopher.
I made every decision based on real maps.
I tested my ideas by translating Ayn Rand's
philosophical statements into mKR.
I translated Aristotle's syllogisms into mKR. (03)
I studied Logic [not including model theory].
I studied Conceptual Graphs.
I studied Formal Concept Analysis.
I studied Situation Theory. (04)
I simplified English grammar.
I focused on the essential properties of actions,
and the characterization of changes by measuring
space, time.
I defined context.
I integrated the UNIX-shell concepts of actions,
procedures, variables, control structures.
I integrated the Unicon concepts of generators
and goal-directed evaluation. (05)
I created mKR in a form that is consistent
with all of the above theories.
I like mKR.
I think in mKR. (06)
Dick McCullough
http://mkrmke.org (07)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ockham (08)
> Dick,
>
> You're confusing apples and spaghetti.
>
> RHM> How about a real mapping, instead of a formal mapping.
> > I'll stick to the example "John F. Sowa is a human."
> > I can go on the internet and Google "John F. Sowa".
> > I can find out where he lives, and see him with my own eyes.
> > I can tell whether he is human or not.
>
> There are many good reasons for analyzing and talking about
> real mappings:
>
> 1. You are designing a robot that has to map symbols to
> input sensors in order to move around and do useful work.
>
> 2. You are a psychologist who is studying the neural and
> linguistic mechanisms that connect human perception
> and action to language processing.
>
> 3. You are a philosopher who is trying to develop a
> comprehensive framework for analyzing the relationships
> between language, thought, perception, and action.
>
> All of those activities (and many more) are worthy pursuits.
>
> If you are designing a system such as mKE and mKR, it is
> good to study the work of those people in order to understand
> how your piece of the puzzle fits with theirs. That is
> a worthy endeavor, and I would encourage you to continue.
>
> But it is also important to recognize that for the purpose
> of giving a precise definition of mKR so that programmers
> can implement it and connect it to their systems, you have
> to focus on the specific details of the symbols and how they
> are related to one another.
>
> Chris Menzel, for example, is a professor of philosophy
> at Texas A & M, and he has studied, published, and taught
> many of the philosophical issues about contexts from many
> different points of view.
>
> But Chris has also collaborated with Pat, and me, and many
> other people in designing logics like CL and IKL. When we're
> doing that, we focus on the issues that are relevant to giving
> a precise definition of the language.
>
> But we also use CL and related languages for a broader range
> of purposes. When we do that, we might use CL to address
> issues such as #1, #2, or #3 above. But then we admit that
> we have switched from growing apples to cooking spaghetti.
> We don't confuse the two kinds of activities.
>
> John
> (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|