ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Inconsistent Theories

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Chris Partridge" <partridge.csj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:29:50 -0000
Message-id: <001b01caaafc$c3ff00f0$4bfd02d0$@googlemail.com>
Hi Pat,    (01)

PC>).  In most
> ontologies (perhaps ISO15926 is an exception) classes (types) are
identified
> by their inclusion conditions.    (02)

I think it may help the discussion if someone makes clear what sense of
'identify' is used in the different contexts. (This is an equivocation that
seems to occur often on this list.)    (03)

In practical terms, people will need to determine whether something falls
under a concept, is an instance of a type (or whatever phrase is used). In
most cases, rules / inclusion conditions are given. This is true of all
extensional ontologies. Including ISO 15926. Let's call this epistemic
identification.    (04)

As your note indicates, in extensional ontologies the criterion of identity
for classes/types is something like 'having the same members'. Lets' call
this ontological criterion of identity.    (05)

So I guess I would want to rephrase your comment to something along the
lines of " In the representation of ontologies, inclusion conditions are
used for epistemic identification of most  classes (types)."    (06)

BTW I am also a little confused by Rob's original comment. If by concept one
means a personal concept - e.g. my concept of horse - then I would tend to
regard (identity?) this as something in my brain (assuming some kind of
mind-brain identity).     (07)

Regards,
Chris    (08)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Patrick Cassidy
> Sent: 10 February 2010 23:29
> To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Inconsistent Theories
> 
> Rob,
>    I can't imagine why you would want to identify concepts with sets (I
> presume you are referring to the instances of some class).  In most
> ontologies (perhaps ISO15926 is an exception) classes (types) are
identified
> by their inclusion conditions.  If you allow possible worlds, the number
of
> possible instances of many sets associated with descriptions are infinite.
> 
> The linguistic phrase " the number of ways you can find agreement
(subsets)
> will  generally be greater than there are elements in either set" conveys
> nothing to me.
> 
>    Can you express these notions in logical notation?  I really can't
figure out
> what your point is.
> 
> Pat
> 
> Patrick Cassidy
> MICRA, Inc.
> 908-561-3416
> cell: 908-565-4053
> cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Freeman
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:52 PM
> > To: [ontolog-forum]
> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Inconsistent Theories
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Patrick Cassidy <pat@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > > Rob Freeman wrote:
> > >> (BTW my answer to that Pat, is that what two contradictory
> > >> descriptions agree on may not be the same from case to case, so you
> > >> still don't get your FO
> > >
> > >    I don't understand your premise and certainly can't see how it
> > leads to
> > > the conclusion.
> > >
> > >   Could you fill in the missing steps?
> >
> > "What two contradictory descriptions agree on may not be the same from
> > case to case": If you identify concepts with sets, and agreement with
> > subsets, the number of ways you can find agreement (subsets) will
> > generally be greater than there are elements in either set.
> >
> > "You still don't get your FO": It will be a poor FO which is larger
> > than the sets it seeks to describe. In fact I think contradiction
> > follows automatically from the greater number.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> _
> > 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
>     (09)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (010)

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