Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping

[Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ed,

Thank you for your response, and I got the point about axiom!

 (Just side note: I do not agree with classification schema!  People are human and animals are animals and birds are birds.  I think it is confusing to call all of them animals.   If Biologist re - visit the classification schema again, and make it close to reality it would help logicians.   One does not have to be born in a country to be citizen.  Citizenship is country specific.  In USA one can become a naturalized citizen by taking up US citizenship.   In Dubai one can  not do that.   But Tigers and elephants are definitely Indian citizens.  They are the pride and joy of India like in Africa.)

Have a good evening!
Pavithra



--- On Thu, 2/4/10, Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, February 4, 2010, 7:39 PM

Pavithra wrote:
> Dr. Sowa,
>
> -   An Elephant is an animal
> -  Clyde is an elephant
> -  Therefore Clyde is an animal
>   

Fine.  Now let us use our very limited vocabulary in the following way:

A citizen of a country is a person born in that country.
A person is an animal.
An elephant is an animal.
Clyde is an elephant.
Clyde was born in India.
Is Clyde a citizen of India?

Maybe.  We can't deny the proposition.
The problem is that we also need a vocabulary that provides the terms to
distinguish "person" from "elephant", and the definition of "person" has
to include those "distinguishing characteristics".  A person is an
animal with some specific properties that distinguish "person" from
"elephant" and, more problematically, from "ape" (or not).  Experience
teaches that it takes an enormous vocabulary to explicitly make all the
distinctions people's brains have learned to make.  It is in making all
the necessary distinctions that the 2000-word vocabulary breaks down.

The alternative of course is that you only need an axiom:  No person is
an elephant.  But then you need a lot of axioms just to sort out
persons, elephants, tigers and mongoose.  And the volume doubles when
you move to Australia.

-Ed

--
Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263                Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263                FAX: +1 301-975-4694

"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."


_________________________________________________________________
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

_________________________________________________________________
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)