[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Past, Present, and Future of Ontology

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Cyclify Austin <cyclify-austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, KR-language <KR-language@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 23:06:51 -0700
Message-id: <51AB042DD2DE48CC8D8FBF4C72F8A089@rhm8200>
Just correcting a few misconceptions, below.    (01)

Dick McCullough
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>    (02)

> But when you claimed that the work you did in the past 5 years with
> no prior study in the field was the equivalent of what all the people
> working on Cyc had done in the past 25 years, that was so ridiculous
> that it immediately classified you as a crank.
I did not say that.  I have studied in the field for 45 years.
I said that I had  no knowledge of the work being done at Cycorp.
I said that my 5-year system was similar to Cycorp's 20-year system.
> RHM> Syntactically, context is represented in the mKR language as
> >
> >    at space = s, time = t, view = v { sentence; };
> >
> > where s, t, v is the context of the sentence.  v is the name of
> > the context, which is implemented as a complex data structure
> > in the mKE program.  s, t name the space-time coordinates which
> > are applicable when sentence involves a "physical" situation
> > such as an action or interaction.
> This kind of representation falls right in the middle of the road
> of the kinds of things that many people have been doing.  It has
> the three parts:  proposition p, context C, and relations space,
> time, and view.  But it lacks the rules of inference that specify
> what kinds of reasoning can be performed on that notation.  Your
> statement about the "complex data structure" v is also rather
> woolly and requires a more precise specification.
Why do you continue to deny that a working computer program
provides any specification of the data structures and the 
In addition, I have posted a lot of details on my website, 
and on KR-language@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> What Pat, Chris, and I have found very irritating is that you keep
> making grandiose claims about having a context language that solves
> all the world's problems.  But in fact, it's similar to what other
> people have been doing for the past 30 years or more.  Unlike those
> other systems, your specification lacks rules of inference.
> RHM> I think in human terms.  Start with a "tabula rasa" brain --
> > where the only propositions are those which correspond to the
> > structure of the human brain, which recognizes "existent", "entity",
> > "part", "attribute", etc.  Then progressively, fill in the context
> > with all the propositions which represent the human's sensory
> > experiences of the external world, and his thinking about those
> > experiences.
> In Matthew's words, that is truly woolly.  Aristotle was also thinking
> in human terms, but he was a very careful analyst.  In his books on
> interpretation and the psyche, he went into great detail about all
> those issues.  In the past two millennia, the greatest philosophers,
> psychologists, linguists, and neurophysiologists have gone considerably
> further, yet many unsolved problems still remain.
> You can do good work in areas of your expertise without having studied
> all those writings.  But when you claim that your woolly paragraph
> is somehow superior to those two millennia of research, you make
> yourself sound like the crankiest of cranks.
> Suggestion:  If you stick to the syntactic and semantic details of
> specifying your notation and defining what it means in computable
> terms, then there's something we can usefully discuss.
> But when you make grandiose claims that your thoughts are somehow
> superior to all those publications you have never read, then we
> just dismiss you as a crank.
"never read" ??? Come on, John.  You know that's not true.
While I have not published any books, you also know that
my "woolly paragraph" is a summary of material published
in the books of Ayn Rand, Leonard Peikoff, David Kelley.
Citations of these books are listed on my website.
> John
>     (03)

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    (04)

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