@
Carlos (01)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:10:50
To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: ontolog-forum Digest, Vol 88, Issue 14 (02)
Send ontolog-forum mailing list submissions to
ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (03)
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ontolog-forum-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (04)
You can reach the person managing the list at
ontolog-forum-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (05)
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ontolog-forum digest..." (06)
Today's Topics: (07)
1. Re: Proceedings: Ontolog invited speaker session - Adam
Cheyer & Tom Gruber on "Siri" - Thu 2010.02.25 (Joel Bender)
2. looking for an artical ASAP! (Riben,Michael Warren)
3. Apple purchases Siri (Christopher Menzel)
4. Re: Apple purchases Siri (Riben,Michael Warren)
5. -Hi- (carl mattocks)
6. Fwd: -Hi- (Peter Yim)
7. Re: The notion of a "classification criterion" as a class
(Bene Rodriguez-Castro)
8. Re: Cultural variation in cognitive machinery (Ali Hashemi)
9. Re: Apple purchases Siri (Peter F Brown (Pensive))
10. Re: Cultural variation in cognitive machinery (Rich Cooper) (08)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- (09)
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:33:48 -0400
From: Joel Bender <jjb5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Proceedings: Ontolog invited speaker
session - Adam Cheyer & Tom Gruber on "Siri" - Thu 2010.02.25
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <AA2BFEF4-3792-4F49-9DDA-6F6920BD465A@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (010)
On Feb 26, 2010, at 12:04 AM, Peter Yim wrote: (011)
> We had, earlier today (Thursday 25-Feb-2010), one of the most exciting
> applications-oriented sessions at the Ontolog Forum. Our invited
> speakers, Dr. Tom Gruber and Mr. Adam Cheyer, made a presentation and
> demonstration on their Siri - Virtual Personal Assistant product, in a
> talk entitled: "Siri: An Ontology-driven Application for the Masses." (012)
I also really enjoyed the presentation and what they have built. I have
enjoyed using the application as well. (013)
> A huge "Thank You" goes out to Mr. Cheyer and Dr. Gruber for this
> great session. We appreciate your sharing with us, not just your
> product, but also the thoughts that went into the design, and some of
> the work under the hood. (014)
In related news, they have been bought by Apple: (015)
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20003671-260.html> (016)
I hope this is a welcome change for them and brings them new resources and
opportunities. With the assumption that it's a good thing, congratulations! (017)
Joel (018)
------------------------------ (019)
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:06:43 -0500
From: "Riben,Michael Warren" <mriben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontolog-forum] looking for an artical ASAP!
To: "'ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'"
<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: (020)
<E103E98F597A1F4DA6C48FC56157364432F28E6275@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (021)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (022)
I need to find the following article..anyone have access to a digital copy of
this article..
mike (023)
Assessing applicability of ontological principles to different types of
biomedical vocabularies. (024)
Author: Ingenerf, J . (025)
Journal: Methods of information in medicine (026)
ISSN: 0026-1270 Date: 2009 (027)
Volume: 48 Issue: 5 Page: 459 (028)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/attachments/20100428/c2dd6189/attachment.html (029)
------------------------------ (030)
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:40:14 -0500
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Apple purchases Siri
To: ontolog-forum <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <1272494414.3224.28.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" (031)
Congrats to Tom Gruber and the other folks responsible for Siri. (032)
http://goo.gl/9s1I (033)
-chris (034)
------------------------------ (035)
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:41:16 -0500
From: "Riben,Michael Warren" <mriben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Apple purchases Siri
To: "'cmenzel@xxxxxxxx'" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>, "'[ontolog-forum] '"
<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: (036)
<E103E98F597A1F4DA6C48FC56157364432F28E628A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (037)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (038)
agree! this is fantastic! like to see Apple throw some money and mindshare at
this! (039)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher Menzel
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 5:40 PM
To: ontolog-forum
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Apple purchases Siri (040)
Congrats to Tom Gruber and the other folks responsible for Siri. (041)
http://goo.gl/9s1I (042)
-chris (043)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (044)
------------------------------ (045)
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:43:49 -0400
From: carl mattocks <carlmattocks@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontolog-forum] -Hi-
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 9083911670@xxxxxxxxxxx,
abhishek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adamsr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
adil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, administrator@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
adrianb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, worksrch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, afuller@xxxxxxxxx,
Ahmed.ali@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID:
<q2xe4a702591004291043o34f138e8gf84075b40d992fe4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 (046)
http://sites.google.com/site/rethb5u6jnfds/elae5h (047)
--
CEO CheckMi
Chair OASIS BCM Tech Committee
President BTUSAR Dive Team
Producer Shore Adventure
Cell (usa) (732) 497-CARL {2275}
CarlMattocks@xxxxxxxxxxx
Semantically Smart: Digital Information Agency (048)
------------------------------ (049)
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:10:09 -0700
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Fwd: -Hi-
To: carl mattocks <carlmattocks@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "\[ontolog-forum\]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<m2qaf8f58ac1004291110t616198dch6a2a1e2ac27efa1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 (050)
ALL: that last message was "spam" ... please ignore. =ppy
-- (051)
Carl, (052)
You are distributing spam ... I have a feeling your computer has been
infected by some malware.
Please do something about it. (053)
Thanks =ppy
-- (054)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: carl mattocks <carlmattocks@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Subject: [ontolog-forum] -Hi-
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 9083911670@xxxxxxxxxxx,
abhishek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adamsr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
adil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, administrator@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
adrianb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, worksrch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, afuller@xxxxxxxxx,
Ahmed.ali@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (055)
http://sites.google.com/site/ rethb5u6jnfds/ elae5h (056)
--
CEO CheckMi
Chair OASIS BCM Tech Committee
President BTUSAR Dive Team
Producer Shore Adventure
Cell (usa) (732) 497-CARL {2275}
CarlMattocks@xxxxxxxxxxx
Semantically Smart: Digital Information Agency (057)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (058)
------------------------------ (059)
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:02:10 +0100
From: Bene Rodriguez-Castro <beroca@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] The notion of a "classification
criterion" as a class
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, public-owl-dev
<public-owl-dev@xxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<i2jea8cd28f1004291202s57fd1991ufff31ac94faa0460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" (060)
Hi Doug,
I found very useful reference [3] from your first reply ( Instances of
Instances Modeled via Higher-Order
Classes<http://www.foxvog.org/doug/higher-order2.pdf>). I realized I
tend to tangle the concept of instance/individual and
class/meta-class but the definitions in the paper together with the ontology
of levels of meta-classes definitely help to clarify these concepts.
(Reference [4] in the same email does not seem to be publicly available
yet). (061)
Some comments in-line below and some requests for clarification if possible.
Thanks,
Bene (062)
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 6:08 AM, doug foxvog <doug@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (063)
> Benedicto Rodriguez <br205r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <br205r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> > :Independent_Entity (aka :Self_Standing_Entity)
>
> > |-- :Grape
> > |-- :WineGrape
> > |-- :MerlotGrape
> > |-- :ChardonnayGrape
> ? |-- (etc...)
>
> > |-- :Wine
> > |-- :MerlotWine
> > |-- :ChardonnayWine
> > |-- (etc... meaning rest of "wines by grape")
>
> > |-- :RedWine
> > |-- :RoseWine
>
> > |-- (etc... meaning rest of "wines by color"
> > although in this case, only :WhiteWine is left)
>
> > |-- :SpecificMerlotWineClass
> > |-- :SpecificRedWineClass
>
> > |-- :SpecificMerlotAndRedWineClass
> > |-- :SpecificChardonnayWineClass
> > |-- :SpecificWhiteWineClass
> > |-- :SpecificChardonnayAndWhiteWineClass
> > |-- (etc... meaning rest of "specific" wine classes that
> > we would need to represent and automatically classify
> > by the reasoner based on their "grape" and "color")
>
> > :Dependent_Entity (aka :Refining_Entity)
> > |-- :Value_Partition
>
> > |-- :WineColor
> > |-- :Red
> > |-- :Rose
> > |-- :White
>
> I question this. Is WineColor a subclass of Value_Partition, an
> instance of Value_Partition, or something else? Also, are :Red,
>
> :Rose, and :White subclasses of :WineColor, instances of :WineColor,
> or do they have some other relationship with :WineColorPartition?
>
>
In this example :Red, :Rose and :White are subclasses of :WineColor.
This is modelled following Pattern 2 (variant 2) in the cited W3C note:
http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-specified-values/. (064)
The relationship between :Value_Partition and :WineColor is an interesting
point. It seems to me now, after the comments in this thread, that the
representation of :Value_Partition as a class is controversial for the same
reasons that classes such as :WineByGrape, :WineByColor and in general XbyY
are. They seem to provide "meta-knowledge". Knowledge about other classes
in the ontology and that cannot be represented as a "class" using OWL DL
set-based semantics. (065)
And although the Normalization mechanism suggests to include the notion of
value partition (or refiner) as a class in the inheritance structure of the
ontology, I realized Alan Rector already referred to this controversy in the
cited paper. (Section "Issues and Problems" in "Modularisation of domain
ontologies Implemented indescription logics and related formalisms including
OWL"). (066)
> Normally, a partition is an instance that identifies a base class
> and a set of mutually disjoint subclasses which span the base class.
>
> This is a binary relationship between a class and a set of classes.
>
> OWL-DL disallows the first argument of a relation from being a class.
> It also does not allow sets of classes to be defined. So, defining
> the partition as a relation in OWL-DL is not possible.
>
>
I agree with this but then I guess I am misinterpreting something
regarding the OWL DL semantics or the elements that participate in the
binary relationship of the partition. (067)
Going back to the W3C note: http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-specified-values/. It
defines two patterns to represent a partition that can be expressed in OWL
DL. (068)
I would interpret the partition in Pattern 1 as a binary relationship
between a class :Health_Value and a set of mutually disjoint *individuals*
that cover the class {:poor_health, :medium_health, good_health}. (069)
I would interpret the partition in Pattern 2 (both variant 1 and 2) as a
binary relationship between a class :Health_Value and a set of mutually
disjoint *subclasses* that cover the parent class
{:Good_health_value, :Medium_health_value, :Poor_health_value}. (070)
The definition of partition that you give (which *cannot* be expressed in
OWL-DL) "seems to align" to the definition in Pattern 2 (which *can* be
expressed in OWL DL). That's why I think I must be misunderstanding
something. (071)
Defining the
> partition as a class means that there are a number of instances of
> the partition, which seems to violate the meaning of partition,
> instantiation, or both. The partition could be defined as an
> instance, but relating the instance to a rule defining the meaning of
> the partition is problematic.
>
> > Some notes/clarifications about this model:
>
> > * For space and simplicity, some important aspects of the Normalisation
> > mechanism have not been fully specified, such as the fact that the
>
> > subclasses of :Wine associated to a classification criterion are "defined
> > classes" (:MerlotWine, ..., WhiteWine) and the specific wine subclasses
> > to be automatically classified by the reasoner are "primitive classes"
>
> > (:SpecificXxxWineClass). For example, [1] and [2] show the definitions
> > of :MerlotWine and :SpecificMerlotWineClass respectively.
>
> This apparently is intended allow for a future definition of a
>WhiteMerlotWine.
>
> > These definitions would cause the reasoner to infer that
> > :SpecificMerlotWineClass is a subclass of :MerlotWine. (Perhaps this link
> > might help illustrate what I'm trying to refer to:
> > http://www.gong.manchester.ac.uk/odp/html/Normalisation.html).
>
> This reference does not duplicate classes with differently named subclasses
> with the same apparent meaning.
>
>
I'm afraid I'm not sure which classes from the :Wine example fit into that
description. (072)
> > * The "wine by color" classification criteria is represented using the
> > "Specified Values" value partition pattern.
> > And again, looking at the inheritance structure of the :Wine hierarchy now
> > *normalised*, it presents the *same* issue mentioned at the beginning of
> > my original email!
>
> This is because the partitions were defined as subclasses of the classes
> which they were intended to partition. The partitions are objects which
> can not be represented in OWL-DL.
>
> > Which was that we could argue that the inheritance structure is not
> > satisfactory because "different concepts are represented by classes at
> > the same level". Sorry for repeating myself, but the structure seems to
> > be "asking" for some classes to separate these different concept groups.
>
> The classes it is asking for are classes of classes ("meta-classes"). But
> since such can not be defined in OWL-DL, you have a problem.
>
>
Yes, I can see this now. (073)
> > The already mentioned :WineByColor, :WineByGrape and now maybe even a
> > :SpecificWine or :NamedWine or for consistency :WineByName classes.
> These are classes of classes, not subclasses of Wine; therefore,
> the below structure does not work.
>
>
Agreed. (074)
> > The hypothetical inheritance structure would be:
>
> > |-- :Wine
> > |-- :WineByGrape
> > |-- :MerlotWine
> > |-- :ChardonnayWine
> > |-- (etc...)
> > ...
>
> > And so, this is my dilemma. The ontology is normalised and still
> > seems to "need" this :WineByClassificationCriterion classes.
>
> You are using a tool that is unable to express such meta-classes.
>
>
Yes. (075)
> > Based on the replies gathered so far, the consensus seems to be
> > that using a class is not the best approach to represent a
> > "classification criterion" in OWL DL.
>
> Correct.
>
> > Allow me to recap. The suggestion instead, is to use a restriction
> > on a property to define the classes that form the "classification
> > criterion".
>
> Not quite. Classes defined by a given *pattern* of rule are all
> classes of one meta-type. Classes defined by a different pattern
> are of a different meta-type. OWL-DL allows one to define
> multiple rules of the same pattern, but it does not allow the
> definition of the rule *patterns*.
>
>
I'm afraid I'm not sure what the generic terms "pattern", "rule",
"meta-type" refer to in this case or how to interpret the statements in the
paragraph in terms of OWL. It would be very helpful if you could you point
out a specific example to help illustrate what it is being referred to by
"meta-type", "pattern of rule", "multiple rules of the same pattern", "the
definition of the rule patterns"... (076)
>
> > For example, :MerlotWine is the restriction of the property
> > :madeFromGrape to :MerlotGrape (see [1]),
>
> Not the restriction itself, but the class defined by the restriction.
>
> > :RedWine is the restriction of the property :hasColor to :Red,
> Again, :RedWine is the class *defined* by the restriction.
>
> > and so on. However, as part of the Normalisation mechanism, all
> > these properties and restrictions are already asserted in the
> > ontology model!
> Sure.
>
> > This leaves me thinking that the "vision" of separating the
> > post-normalisation flat hierarchy of subclasses of :Wine (or
> > :Person or in general any other normalised :DomainConcept) into
> > homogeneous subgroups is *not really necessary or possible* after
> > all, given the semantics of OWL DL.
>
> It is not possible using the semantics of OWL-DL.
>
> The classes from the different meta-classes are not necessarily
> disjoint, so making a flat hierarchy instead of a directed
> acyclic graph is not possible.
>
> It is possible to define the meta-classes in more powerful languages,
> howerver.
>
> -- doug
>
> > Not sure if everyone would agree with that as the final conclusion
> > but if that was the case, it would feel somehow kind of hard to accept.
> > ...
> > Any comments or feedback are indeed very welcome.
> > Regards,
> > Bene Rodriguez-Castro
>
>
> The following two definitions are identical. I'm guessing that
> you intended to make the second one a rdfs:subClassOf :RedWine ;
> -- doug
>
>
I don't think they are *identical* thou. These are the intended
definitions. There is one difference:
The class :MerlotWine is *equivalent* to the class defined by the someValue
restriction on the the property :madeFromGrape.
The class :SpecificMerlotWineClass is a *subclass* of the class defined by
the same restriction of the same property.
This representation allows a reasoner to infer that :SpecificMerlotWineClass
is a subclass of :MerlotWine.
This sort of "pattern" is one of the keys in the Normalization mechanism in
order to enable a reasoner to infer all multiple inheritance relations among
the classes involved in an ontology model. (077)
> > ----
> > [1] Definition of :MerlotWine.
>
> :MerlotWine rdf:type owl:Class ;
> rdfs:subClassOf :Wine ;
> owl:equivalentClass [ rdf:type owl:Restriction ;
> owl:onProperty :madeFromGrape ;
> owl:someValuesFrom :MerlotGrape ] .
>
> [2] Defintion of :SpecificMerlotWineClass.
>
> :SpecificMerlotWineClass rdf:type owl:Class ;
>
> rdfs:subClassOf :Wine ,
> [ rdf:type owl:Restriction ;
> owl:onProperty :madeFromGrape ;
> owl:someValuesFrom :MerlotGrape ] .
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/attachments/20100429/8ecfed08/attachment.html (078)
------------------------------ (079)
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:26:53 -0400
From: Ali Hashemi <ali.hashemi+ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Cultural variation in cognitive machinery
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<p2t5ab1dc971004292026ge00ecbbv3ad03bfe64606f6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" (080)
Folks, I hate to resurrect a dead thread, but I finally got one of my
machines where I'm at, which means I got access to my archives... Please
bear with me, I'm only sharing relevant reading for anyone who's interested. (081)
---- (082)
John, (083)
You're absolutely right, this isn't the best way to conduct discourse. I
appreciate the sources you mention, and would like to add a number more. (084)
I would be happy to disagree with Pat if I thought we were actually talking
about the same thing, but he has criticized something which has little to do
with what I've exposited. And I actually agree with the criticism of what he
thinks I've been claiming! I just haven't been claiming it ;). (085)
Pat, (086)
I'll put this "arduous communication" down to a limitation of the current
medium which makes it difficult for us to be able to effectively share our
thoughts. Over a beer or two, or perhaps with some more clarified
background, what I've been trying to communicate might actually get through,
and perhaps then, we could actually disagree :D! (087)
[PH] The original claim, to which I reacted, was that the way we **learn to
> think** is culturally dependent. I take this to be a claim about
> developmental psychology, and perhaps (with less emphasis on the 'learn')
> about cognitive psychology in general.
> (088)
Interesting. Nowhere have I made the first claim you think I have - I have
absolutely no idea where you got that impression. (089)
[PH]I would take a lot of convincing, but perhaps some psychological
> experiments which clearly indicated a difference in actual modes of thinking
> between populations in different cultural settings. As I say, I have never
> seen any (convincing) such demonstrations. Observations along the lines that
> cultures are culturally different do not make the cut.
> (090)
Great! See below for a start... (091)
The ideas I've mentioned are well grounded in copious amounts of literature.
In the forum posts, I added a couple of minor twists alluding to extensions
to logic, but they're secondary. The papers below are only a glimpse of some
of the supporting literature; I'll actually refrain from further posts on
this topic until I write up something more shareable (ie write in a more
standard medium, not forum posts, but say journal article styles) (092)
Further reading: (093)
***************************
*Metaphors* (Point to overlap / interaction between sense and domain
knowledge) (094)
Work on how metaphors affect our thinking, and become ingrained in our
analysis of situations
*Marcel Danesi (2002) "Abstract Concept-Formation As Metaphorical Layering"
Studies In Communication Sciences 2/1 (2002) 1-22 (095)
More on metaphor and thinking:
*S Pinker (2007)- The Stuff of Thought - Penguin Group (Viking Press) (096)
and of course, when talking about metaphor and thinking. They've got a few
good examples in here. How some cultures view "argument as war" and have
increasingly fortified positions, whereas others view it as "dance" and work
more collaboratively.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphors_We_Live_By)
*G Lakoff & M Johnson (1980) - Metaphors We Live By - Chicago University
Press (097)
***************************
*Cognitive Neuroscience* (098)
The spillover between sensory motor systems and cognition.
*Susan Hurley "Perception And Action: Alternative Views"
Synthese 129 (2001) 3-40. (099)
More on the spill over between sensory motor system and cognition.
*Vittorio Gallese & George Lakoff (2005) "The Brain?s Concepts: The Role Of
The Sensory-Motor System In Conceptual Knowledge"
Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2005, 22 (3/4), 455?479 (0100)
Some research suggesting that we use our motor system metaphorically to
learn about novel domains
*Llinas, RR; Leznik, E; Makarenko, VI. (2004) "The olivo-cerebellar circuit
as a universal motor control system". *
IEEE journal of oceanic engineering*. 2004; 29: 631 (0101)
A high level overview
*Llinas R. "Progress in Brain Research: Epilogue". *Progress in brain
research*. 2004; 148: 393 (0102)
***************************
*Perception, Tools, Culture and Habituation* (0103)
On the habituation and internalization of views through repeated interaction
with the world
*Stratton, G.(1897) "Vision without inversion of the retinal image" Psychol
Rev; 4 pp. 341-
60, 463-81. (0104)
On the effects of culture and expression of ideas in art
*McLuhan, M. Parker, H. (1968) Through the vanishing point: space in poetry
and painting.
Harper and Row, New York (0105)
On the effects of culture and perception
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v308/n5960/pdf/308580d0.pdf
*Jonathan Treitel (1984) Correspondence.
Nature 308, 580 (12 April 1984) | doi:10.1038/308580d0 (0106)
Some clarification on an interpretation of cognitive process
*Lonergan BJ. (1958) Insight Darton, Longman and Todd, London (0107)
More on how the tools we use shape how we think about whatever it is we're
interacting with through that tool
*Ames, A Jr. "Visual perception and the rotating trapezoidal window"
Psychological Monographs (1951); 65, whole no. 324. (0108)
***************************
*Connotations and Semiotics* (0109)
Almost embarrassed to include this next one.. but I I'm starting to worry
about the fact that the connection to "connotations" in semiotics has not
been noticed...
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connotation_%28semiotics%29 )
e.g. "Bob is in Florida." What this sentence denotes has not changed in the
last 1000 years, but the connotations have. Perhaps Pat is arguing that
connotations play no significant role in cognition? (0110)
*Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology (trans. Annette Lavers & Colin
Smith). London: Jonathan Cape. (1967). (0111)
The title of the next work is self-explanatory:
*Jonathan Bignell (1997) Media Semiotics - An Introduction. Manchester
University Press, Manchester. (0112)
***************************
*Rationality, Decision Making and Emotions*
the field of economics, persuasion, marketing etc. have abundant literature
on how emotion affects thinking, i.e.: (0113)
How emotion affects decision making (i.e. the criteria that we use to decide
what is reasonable / appropriate / desirable)
*Loewenstein, G. & Learner, J. S. (2003) "The Role of Affect in Decision
Making"
In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), 2003 Handbook of
affective sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(pp.619-642). (0114)
How depending on what frame of mind we are in, and what cues we respond to,
we will decide differently..
*Itamar Simonson (1989) "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and
Compromise Effects"
Journal of Consumer Research September 1989, Vol. 16, No. 2: pp. 158 (0115)
On how what you do affects how you think and can carry over into the next
task
*Jennifer S. Lerner, D Small and G Loewenstein (2004) "Heart Strings and
Purse Strings - Carryover Effects of Emotions on Economic Decisions"
Journal of Psychological Science, vol. 15 no. 5 337-341 (0116)
*H J Einhorn, and R M Hogarth (1981) - "Behavioral Decision Theory:
Processes of Judgement and Choice"
Annual Review of Psychology Vol. 32: 53-88 (0117)
you don't need to accept that fast food is correlated to impatience (I dont
believe it either, there were too many holes in the experiment, but it
raises good questions) to accept that, if what you do affects your emotions
/ temperament / disposition, then you'll reason differently than you would
otherwise...
*************************** (0118)
Best, (0119)
Ali (0120)
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:32 AM, John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (0121)
> Pat, Ali, and anyone else who might still be listening,
>
> Trading opinions about poorly defined terms that various people
> interpret in different ways is never going to converge.
>
> I'd like to recommend some books by people who have actually
> done research on related topics and have some useful facts
> to add to the speculation.
>
> The first book is a collaboration by two authors -- a psychiatrist
> who spent many years in studying the psychology of young children,
> especially from the ages of zero to three, and a philosopher who
> had been highly skeptical about the claims of apes learning to
> use language-like symbols until he spent an extended period of
> time actually working with them:
>
> Greenspan, Stanley I., & Stuart G. Shanker (2004) _The First
> Idea: How Symbols, Language, and Intelligence Evolved from
> Our Primate Ancestors to Modern Humans_, Da Capo Press,
> Cambridge, MA.
>
> The second book is a good summary of the recent research on
> the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons (up to the end of 2008):
>
> Fagan, Brian (2010) _Cro-Magnon: How the Ice Age Gave Birth
> to the First Modern Humans_, Bloomsbury Press, New York.
>
> My only criticism of Fagan's book is based on issues discussed
> by Greenspan and Shanker: Fagan tends to underestimate the
> abilities of the Neanderthals because their technology was
> not as advanced as the newcomers who came from Africa.
>
> But much of that difference in technology could be explained
> by the fact that the Neanderthal society in Europe was much
> smaller than the societies in Africa, which was a much larger
> continent with a much more diverse range of climates and
> environments. The greater number of interactions in Africa
> would have stimulated an enormous amount of the innovation.
>
> Fagan admits that point, but I believe that he underestimates
> its importance. Just look at the difference between the
> European technology and the indigenous technology in the
> Americas and Australia.
>
> John
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (0122)
--
Founding Director, www.reseed.ca
www.pinkarmy.org (0123)
(?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,.,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/attachments/20100429/287d0bbf/attachment.html (0124)
------------------------------ (0125)
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:35:23 -0700
From: "Peter F Brown (Pensive)" <Peter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Apple purchases Siri
To: "cmenzel@xxxxxxxx" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum] "
<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<CCFAAA135DF6554F92BACD35A80653D705DFB55A31@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (0126)
+1, kudos to Tom for seeing this through. (0127)
The only downside is that Siri will never see the light of day now on any other
platform than the most proprietary, locked-down, ecosystem that is Apple - a
pity, but that's business! (0128)
On a separate point: why is the press so hyped up about this being part of
Apple's challenge to Google? Where do they suppose Siri - and for that matter,
a large proportion of Apple apps - get much of their search and mapping data
from and what do such queries tell Google except even more about every single
user? Both Apple and Google stand to gain from this and similar acquisitions. (0129)
Peter (0130)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher Menzel
Sent: Wed, 28 April 2010 15:40
To: ontolog-forum
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Apple purchases Siri (0131)
Congrats to Tom Gruber and the other folks responsible for Siri. (0132)
http://goo.gl/9s1I (0133)
-chris (0134)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (0135)
------------------------------ (0136)
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:10:18 -0700
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Cultural variation in cognitive machinery
To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <20100430051026.C2446138D3E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" (0137)
Welcome back to the online world Ali. (0138)
I would like to add one reference to your list below, which I think you may
find appropriate. Its ultimately from Nietsche, but quoted here: (0139)
http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm (0140)
In his typical vitriolic fashion, Nietzsche completes his last prose work,
Ecce Homo, by condemning his early profession, namely, that of the scholarly
life.(2) <http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm#N_2_#N_2_>
Scholars, Nietzsche asserted, had lost the taste for life. Instead, given
the constant intercourse with books, the scholar had been shorn of the
capacity to think, and hence, reduced to no more than a "reacting medium."
As such, the scholar "exhausts his whole strength in saying either `yes' or
`no' to a matter which has already been thought out ... In him the instinct
of self-defence has decayed, otherwise he would defend himself against
books. The scholar is decadent."(3)
<http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm#N_3_#N_3_> (0141)
Nietzsche accounted for this decadence as the loss of trust in the "artistic
mastery"(4)
<http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm#N_4_#N_4_> of one's
instinct. What scholars forgot was that the relation between interpretation
and the text is not one of contemplation, rather, it belonged to the realm
of struggle and overcoming. In other words, the act of interpretation was
synonymous with the surge of life. For Nietzsche, to be and to interpret
were one and the same.(5)
<http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm#N_5_#N_5_> In fact,
we are never presented with a text to be investigated, rather, it is us, the
reader, who creatively constitute the sense of the text.(6)
<http://www25.brinkster.com/marcsgalaxy/imagination.htm#N_6_#N_6_> (0142)
-Rich (0143)
Sincerely, (0144)
Rich Cooper (0145)
EnglishLogicKernel.com (0146)
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com (0147)
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (0148)
_____ (0149)
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ali Hashemi
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:27 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Cultural variation in cognitive machinery (0150)
Folks, I hate to resurrect a dead thread, but I finally got one of my
machines where I'm at, which means I got access to my archives... Please
bear with me, I'm only sharing relevant reading for anyone who's interested. (0151)
---- (0152)
John, (0153)
You're absolutely right, this isn't the best way to conduct discourse. I
appreciate the sources you mention, and would like to add a number more. (0154)
I would be happy to disagree with Pat if I thought we were actually talking
about the same thing, but he has criticized something which has little to do
with what I've exposited. And I actually agree with the criticism of what he
thinks I've been claiming! I just haven't been claiming it ;). (0155)
Pat, (0156)
I'll put this "arduous communication" down to a limitation of the current
medium which makes it difficult for us to be able to effectively share our
thoughts. Over a beer or two, or perhaps with some more clarified
background, what I've been trying to communicate might actually get through,
and perhaps then, we could actually disagree :D! (0157)
[PH] The original claim, to which I reacted, was that the way we **learn to
think** is culturally dependent. I take this to be a claim about
developmental psychology, and perhaps (with less emphasis on the 'learn')
about cognitive psychology in general. (0158)
Interesting. Nowhere have I made the first claim you think I have - I have
absolutely no idea where you got that impression. (0159)
[PH]I would take a lot of convincing, but perhaps some psychological
experiments which clearly indicated a difference in actual modes of thinking
between populations in different cultural settings. As I say, I have never
seen any (convincing) such demonstrations. Observations along the lines that
cultures are culturally different do not make the cut. (0160)
Great! See below for a start... (0161)
The ideas I've mentioned are well grounded in copious amounts of literature.
In the forum posts, I added a couple of minor twists alluding to extensions
to logic, but they're secondary. The papers below are only a glimpse of some
of the supporting literature; I'll actually refrain from further posts on
this topic until I write up something more shareable (ie write in a more
standard medium, not forum posts, but say journal article styles) (0162)
Further reading: (0163)
*************************** (0164)
Metaphors (Point to overlap / interaction between sense and domain
knowledge) (0165)
Work on how metaphors affect our thinking, and become ingrained in our
analysis of situations
*Marcel Danesi (2002) "Abstract Concept-Formation As Metaphorical Layering"
Studies In Communication Sciences 2/1 (2002) 1-22 (0166)
More on metaphor and thinking:
*S Pinker (2007)- The Stuff of Thought - Penguin Group (Viking Press) (0167)
and of course, when talking about metaphor and thinking. They've got a few
good examples in here. How some cultures view "argument as war" and have
increasingly fortified positions, whereas others view it as "dance" and work
more collaboratively.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphors_We_Live_By)
*G Lakoff & M Johnson (1980) - Metaphors We Live By - Chicago University
Press (0168)
*************************** (0169)
Cognitive Neuroscience (0170)
The spillover between sensory motor systems and cognition.
*Susan Hurley "Perception And Action: Alternative Views"
Synthese 129 (2001) 3-40. (0171)
More on the spill over between sensory motor system and cognition.
*Vittorio Gallese & George Lakoff (2005) "The Brain?s Concepts: The Role Of
The Sensory-Motor System In Conceptual Knowledge"
Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2005, 22 (3/4), 455?479 (0172)
Some research suggesting that we use our motor system metaphorically to
learn about novel domains
*Llinas, RR; Leznik, E; Makarenko, VI. (2004) "The olivo-cerebellar circuit
as a universal motor control system".
IEEE journal of oceanic engineering. 2004; 29: 631 (0173)
A high level overview
*Llinas R. "Progress in Brain Research: Epilogue". Progress in brain
research. 2004; 148: 393 (0174)
***************************
Perception, Tools, Culture and Habituation (0175)
On the habituation and internalization of views through repeated interaction
with the world
*Stratton, G.(1897) "Vision without inversion of the retinal image" Psychol
Rev; 4 pp. 341-
60, 463-81. (0176)
On the effects of culture and expression of ideas in art
*McLuhan, M. Parker, H. (1968) Through the vanishing point: space in poetry
and painting.
Harper and Row, New York (0177)
On the effects of culture and perception
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v308/n5960/pdf/308580d0.pdf
*Jonathan Treitel (1984) Correspondence.
Nature 308, 580 (12 April 1984) | doi:10.1038/308580d0 (0178)
Some clarification on an interpretation of cognitive process
*Lonergan BJ. (1958) Insight Darton, Longman and Todd, London (0179)
More on how the tools we use shape how we think about whatever it is we're
interacting with through that tool
*Ames, A Jr. "Visual perception and the rotating trapezoidal window"
Psychological Monographs (1951); 65, whole no. 324. (0180)
*************************** (0181)
Connotations and Semiotics (0182)
Almost embarrassed to include this next one.. but I I'm starting to worry
about the fact that the connection to "connotations" in semiotics has not
been noticed...
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connotation_%28semiotics%29 )
e.g. "Bob is in Florida." What this sentence denotes has not changed in the
last 1000 years, but the connotations have. Perhaps Pat is arguing that
connotations play no significant role in cognition? (0183)
*Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology (trans. Annette Lavers & Colin
Smith). London: Jonathan Cape. (1967). (0184)
The title of the next work is self-explanatory:
*Jonathan Bignell (1997) Media Semiotics - An Introduction. Manchester
University Press, Manchester. (0185)
***************************
Rationality, Decision Making and Emotions (0186)
the field of economics, persuasion, marketing etc. have abundant literature
on how emotion affects thinking, i.e.: (0187)
How emotion affects decision making (i.e. the criteria that we use to decide
what is reasonable / appropriate / desirable)
*Loewenstein, G. & Learner, J. S. (2003) "The Role of Affect in Decision
Making"
In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), 2003 Handbook of
affective sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(pp.619-642). (0188)
How depending on what frame of mind we are in, and what cues we respond to,
we will decide differently..
*Itamar Simonson (1989) "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and
Compromise Effects"
Journal of Consumer Research September 1989, Vol. 16, No. 2: pp. 158 (0189)
On how what you do affects how you think and can carry over into the next
task
*Jennifer S. Lerner, D Small and G Loewenstein (2004) "Heart Strings and
Purse Strings - Carryover Effects of Emotions on Economic Decisions"
Journal of Psychological Science, vol. 15 no. 5 337-341 (0190)
*H J Einhorn, and R M Hogarth (1981) - "Behavioral Decision Theory:
Processes of Judgement and Choice"
Annual Review of Psychology Vol. 32: 53-88 (0191)
you don't need to accept that fast food is correlated to impatience (I dont
believe it either, there were too many holes in the experiment, but it
raises good questions) to accept that, if what you do affects your emotions
/ temperament / disposition, then you'll reason differently than you would
otherwise...
*************************** (0192)
Best, (0193)
Ali (0194)
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:32 AM, John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (0195)
Pat, Ali, and anyone else who might still be listening, (0196)
Trading opinions about poorly defined terms that various people
interpret in different ways is never going to converge. (0197)
I'd like to recommend some books by people who have actually
done research on related topics and have some useful facts
to add to the speculation. (0198)
The first book is a collaboration by two authors -- a psychiatrist
who spent many years in studying the psychology of young children,
especially from the ages of zero to three, and a philosopher who
had been highly skeptical about the claims of apes learning to
use language-like symbols until he spent an extended period of
time actually working with them: (0199)
Greenspan, Stanley I., & Stuart G. Shanker (2004) _The First
Idea: How Symbols, Language, and Intelligence Evolved from
Our Primate Ancestors to Modern Humans_, Da Capo Press,
Cambridge, MA. (0200)
The second book is a good summary of the recent research on
the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons (up to the end of 2008): (0201)
Fagan, Brian (2010) _Cro-Magnon: How the Ice Age Gave Birth
to the First Modern Humans_, Bloomsbury Press, New York. (0202)
My only criticism of Fagan's book is based on issues discussed
by Greenspan and Shanker: Fagan tends to underestimate the
abilities of the Neanderthals because their technology was
not as advanced as the newcomers who came from Africa. (0203)
But much of that difference in technology could be explained
by the fact that the Neanderthal society in Europe was much
smaller than the societies in Africa, which was a much larger
continent with a much more diverse range of climates and
environments. The greater number of interactions in Africa
would have stimulated an enormous amount of the innovation. (0204)
Fagan admits that point, but I believe that he underestimates
its importance. Just look at the difference between the
European technology and the indigenous technology in the
Americas and Australia. (0205)
John (0206)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (0207)
--
Founding Director, www.reseed.ca
www.pinkarmy.org (0208)
(?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., (0209)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/attachments/20100429/98cb9742/attachment.html (0210)
------------------------------ (0211)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (0212)
End of ontolog-forum Digest, Vol 88, Issue 14
********************************************* (0213)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (0214)
|