[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Peirce & tabula rasa & proposition names

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: KR-language <KR-language@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:23:14 -0700
Message-id: <4E4A128A0E164DF6B369CF58D1D629E1@rhm8200>
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Last call: OWL 2 and rdf:text primitive datatype

> Suggestion:  It's fine to use your favorite philosophy as a guide
> toward making design decisions, but the formal definitions should
> be as independent as possible of the philosophy that inspired you.
> You can talk about that philosophy in the informal commentary,
> but I recommend that you keep it out of the formalism.
> John
In my recent email entitled "Peirce & tabula rasa & proposition names",
I related my tabula rasa terminology to Peirce's categories.
I have made my mKR language dependent on Peirce's [and Rand's]
I did that because "a different syntax for different categories" philosophy
makes it easier to express knowledge in mKR.
For anyone who  prefers the "one syntax for all categories" philosophy
of RDF, by all means use RDF (or a sublanguage of mKR).
Not wanting to drop context, my "2. group 3" propositions include the
philosophy that propositions are created by humans.
Dick McCullough


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    (01)

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