[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Inconsistent Theories

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 11:24:00 -0600
Message-id: <530ED837-62BF-4EA5-A48B-0AE47E59AA0C@xxxxxxxx>
On Feb 9, 2010, at 4:36 AM, Ian Bailey wrote:
> Hi Chris (M),
> You wrote:
>> I have to say again, I don't think there's much practical upshot here.
>> Seems pretty unlikely to me that any real world ontology is going to be
>> interested in declaring that there exists some specific finite number of
>> things.
> I may have missed the context of this statement, but it seems rather at odds
> with my experience. Singleton and doubleton classes are not that unusual in
> ontology, and their membership is finite.     (01)

Of course, but I am not denying that.  I am not saying it is unusual for an 
ontology to say such things as "There are exactly N Fs", e.g., "There are 
exactly 100 US Senators".  I am saying it would be unusual for an ontology to 
say "There are exactly N things", PERIOD; that is, it would be weird for an 
ontology to specify precisely the number of things, of any kind whatever, that 
exist in the (relevant) universe.    (02)

-chris    (03)

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    (04)

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