Re: [ontolog-forum] UK apology for its treatment of Turing

[Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>]

Rich

we should keep the discussion on list if iwe can make its relevance to ontology really clear

I believe we can attempt to do so to some extent 

these days I am more inclined to share  facts than opinions :-)

(in modern history/science everything seems to be putdown to the Greek, but that is rather false, please  refer to the old discussion here
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-06/msg00451.html
with a link posted by Gary BC)

It seems to me that misrepresentation would require intent by the misrepresenter.  Other than intentional misrepresentation, every subjective point of view is by definition valid if consistent and complete.

Yes, relative to itself it is complete, but not relative to 'what is' 
Not just intent, it simply requires 'ignorance' of some fact

and without exception, we are all 'ignorant' about something or other
unless you can claim omniscience (workin on it anyone)

It is much safer to assume that it is complete 'insofar as we can see' ( precious postillas)

Travelling far and wide helps me understand that,  I get examples everyday.

 In Korea the sanskrit aum sillable decorates the taoist temples, but the majority of Koreans have no clue as to what that sign means (they seemed interested to find out though) or how it got there.They think its a purely decorative sign, they are not taught 
that sign means a lot, a lot of history.

I went to Turkey for the first time this year, just to find out that the 'sacred fire mountain' is in  the ancient Olympos,  the only place on earth where this special gas self ignites on te mountain 
I touched it with my hands  (got some photos on facebook)

the place now is a ruin that the majority of turkish tourist throw rubbish, empty cans, and cigarette butts in the ancient eternal fire, which is open to the public and still barely burning,  its the original reference to the eternal fire in various philosophical literature, it's a place of unique historical importance, and for some reason, not a Unesco heritage yet I dont think

the average european tourist (including myself before I went to turkey) believes that Olympos is in Greece, and I seem to understand that the new Olympos i Greece was founded after the original Olumpos was lost to the Turks? (
look what the average tourist literature says:
http://www.sacredsites.com/europe/greece/mt_olympus.html


but Olympos is here, in ancient Lycia
http://www.turkeytravelplanner.com/go/med/olimpos/chimera.html

and the eternal flames are still burning (barely) 

I was shocked to find out the state of the place, and no wonder the fire is about to be estinguished (I made a flower offerting on everybody's behalf, btw (lol)


A lot of what we think we know, is based on partial knowledge
My brother is sure that Mazda is a car name, and it is true, Mazda is a car name
but a lot more as well

http://www.ece.lsu.edu/kak/zoro.pdf

In Italy when i was a kid, Ariel was a famous name of a popular detergent , cause we
watched the tv adverts everyday 'arieeeeel'. I once met a guy who lived next block
and he told me his name was Ariel, I laughed my head off cause I thought it was really funny name calling a boy as the most famous detergent in the country, til I realised I had lots of  reading to catch up with.  :-)

and so on.....

Not sure I address your argument,
but gotta catch some sun
http://tinysong.com/9DKT


pdm

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Rich Cooper <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Paola, please see my comments below.

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

The lesson that we can learn, and probably the only portion of this thread relevant  to this forum, is that a lot of deviation can arise from misrepresentation of knowledge
and a lot of ignorance suffering and evil can be caused by accepting
what is transmitted by society at face value and without questioning and without proper inquiry and demistification.
Ant that it takes courage and self sacrifice to do that...


PDM

It seems to me that misrepresentation would require intent by the misrepresenter.  Other than intentional misrepresentation, every subjective point of view is by definition valid if consistent and complete.  So your description intrigues me; it would be interesting to see exactly where our opinions differ on that, if you don’t mind discussing it here.  We could take the topic off-line if you prefer. 

-Rich

_________________________________________________________________
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
 

-- 
Paola Di Maio
**************************************************
Networked Research Lab, UK

***************************************************
_________________________________________________________________
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)