|
John, Dick
- I am afraid, again we have missed the mention of Upanishads that are agreed to be at least a few millenia BC (~5000 years ago) that are based on Reasoning (NYAYA-Logic) the branch of Indian Philosophy well practiced to date.
- Please refer to the earlier quoted (about a year ago) Nasadiya Sukta of Rigveda that deals with reasoning relating to creation of this Universe (including Life), another verse deals with Seasons and "cyclic nature of time" concepts such as the annual cycle etc. These are also described in words that are in some places like math.These also do not disagree with modern physics but support it.
- I would suggest such references from earliest mature cultures with reasoning be put at least in the History of Ontology.
- I would not even venture to guess the amount of time some eastern cultures have invested in mind- thinking-reasoning processes including subjects such as "nature of being".
Regards.
--
Thanks.
Ravi
(Dr. Ravi Sharma)
313 204 1740 Mobile
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Richard H. McCullough <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dick,
>
> It is hard to imagine how anybody could say anything more
> simple-minded that that:
#### Is it really so simple-minded, when the next words out of
#### your mouth are "context is certainly relevant"?
>
> RHM> All of your "problems" can be summarized in one word: CONTEXT.
> > The "solutions" are readily available: use a CONTEXT LANGUAGE.
> > mKR is a CONTEXT LANGUAGE.
>
> Context is certainly relevant. There are many well thought out
> theories and formalisms that have addressed the subject of context.
> But doing justice to the subject requires far more than a notation
> that happens to be decorated with the word 'context'.
#### If context is the central problem, then how can you deal with
#### the problem, unless you have a language based on context?
#### If you think that context is only a "decoration" in the mKR
#### language, then you don't understand mKR at all.
>
> Please do your homework, study the issues, and read the many volumes
> of publications by people who have actually done their homework.
#### Context is an essential ingredient of Cyc.
#### Have they done their homework?
#### Is the Cyc philosophy relevant to the
#### "Past, Present, and Future of Ontology"?
#### I grant that you are a great scholar, John.
#### But can't you put aside your academic bias long enough
#### to consider whether I am right or not?
>
> John
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|