At the risk of dragging this thread out, could you please
elaborate (in a few sentences) what your understanding of “Context” is ?
I think everyone’s agreed that context is essential,
[MW] Actually I don’t. I agree that context is used for what you
cannot be bothered to make explicit, and the answer is simple – be bothered to
make it explicit, then you have no need for context.
Regards
Matthew West
Information Junction
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered
in England and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden
City, Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
From:
"Christopher Menzel" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
>
>> #### I grant that you are a great scholar, John.
>> #### But can't you put aside your academic bias
>
> Be careful. "academic bias" is a favorite epithet among
cranks the
> world over, who blame their lack of acceptance within the academic
> community on prejudice (or envy, or the desire for power, or...)
> rather than any shortcomings in their work. I'm supposing you
don't
> want to be considered among their company.
>
>> #### long enough to consider whether I am right or not?
>
> It is *because* John is a scholar with a vast knowledge of the
history
> of AI and KR that it is so obvious to him why your work does not
begin
> to measure up to the standards of the field. What *you* need to do
is
> set "put aside" the idea that you have single-handedly solved
the most
> vexing problems of AI and KR and follow John's advice: Do your homework.
I
do not doubt John's knowledge.
The
fact is, he never addresses my ideas.
He
"cops out" by telling me to do my homework.
If I
do not do my homework,
This
is an obvious non sequitur.
This is
what I am calling "academic bias".