ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontologies as social mediators (was:Ontologydevelopm

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "FERENC KOVACS" <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 19:10:47 -0000
Message-id: <C2E33D6B0A344BEA9AE53C10ED21F8C2@Swindon>
Chris,
I love your post, and am nt upset at all, but being on a train now, I am 
postponing my detailed reply for a little while
Regards
Ferenc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Menzel" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontologies as social mediators 
(was:Ontologydevelopment method)    (01)


> On Dec 1, 2009, at 10:51 AM, FERENC KOVACS wrote:
>> ...I find that the basic laws of logic, i. e. the law of identity, etc. 
>> are not endorsed by reason seeing truth as the ultimate criteria of 
>> anything worth stating and accepting as plausible knowledge.
>
> If what you say is true, you should be able to give a valid argument for 
> it. However, if what you say is true, it will not be possible for you to 
> do so, since a valid argument must depend on the validity of the basic 
> laws of logic.  Hence, what you say is not true.  (Of course, you will not 
> accept this argument since it depends on the argument pattern Reductio Ad 
> Absurdum, which according to you is not endorsed by reason and hence, 
> presumably, is not valid.)
>
>> On the contrary, they are endorsed by emotion and will,
>
> So I guess it follows for you (although how can it *follow* if there are 
> no objectively valid logical laws by which one thing follows from 
> another?) that there can be no debates.  Rather, on your telling, we 
> simply throw out our opinions (all of them ungrounded in argument, it 
> appears) and hope that others will accept them in virtue of a sudden flood 
> of emotion or a non-rational act of will.  And, indeed, reading through 
> your post, it does appear to be simply a series of assertions with nary an 
> argument to be found so you do appear to be consistent on that score.
>
>> since truth is something people are ready to fight for and anything 
>> claimed to be not true would normally upset the person claiming that 
>> point, if challenged.
>
> I hope I haven't upset you. ;-)
>
> Chris Menzel
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>     (02)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (03)

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