John Bottoms wrote:
JB> Can pre-existant knowledge to be ignored in
creating an ontology?
Are there temporal and atemporal ontologies? Are there
non-PeK ontologies? And, can we really separate the
"All instruction given or received by way
proceeds from pre-existent
"The pre-existent knowledge required
is of two kinds. In some
cases admission of the fact must be
assumed, in others
comprehension of the meaning of the
term used, and sometimes
both assumptions are essential.
Thus, we assume that every
predicate can be either truly
affirmed or truly denied of any
Logic, Book 1
I want to use the bio word
"ontogeny" to represent the sequence of inferences, iteratively
applied to the results of the last inferred axiom set. Think of a linear,
discrete time system. I think we all share the math behind control
theory, which is a set of calculations, begun with a constant, and stepped
throughout a trajectory. Ask if I am skipping too lightly over this
assumed math background.
The first set of axioms in an ontogeny
must be constants, with respect to the other axiom sets generated during the
iterative process of building new memories on top of old ones. Think of a
fertilized egg developing in steps.
So in an analogous way, we are discussing
the actual development of agency knowledge, and its refinement, based on the
reality experienced as a sequence of sampled values.
Is this a fruitful approach?
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com