[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] new logic

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:08 +0000
Message-id: <4a4804720911181239j3d12adf4n2a0c335824480a8c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

No one on this list has ever said that.  You, and others, have *said*
that others have said that.
I am pretty sure I read it on this list (not sure when or who or in relation to what)
some kind of categorical statement that 'another type of logic' is not possible, that there is only the
FOL kind, of which all the others are subsets of. Which is possibly also true, to some extent, under certain scientific paradigm.
Its also a known epistemological stance, largely prevalent in the 'exact sciences' circles, where 'fuzzy logic' is a dirty word, for example.
But dont have time to search the archive now.

> I myself and others, without being able to prove just yet, say that
> there are different type of logic (cant quite tell what I mean by that

Which, I'm afraid, is sometimes part of the problem.

Thats the nature of expertimental work... in the meantime, since I started my observations,
much progress has been made....

watch this space....



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)

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