[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ockham

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 05:42:36 -0700
Message-id: <E0B72A6E07454370984140249F9E4A91@rhm8200>
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)

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