[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] semantic analysis was do not trust quantifiers

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:02:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <56316.>
On Fri, September 24, 2010 6:22, FERENC KOVACS said:
> Rich:
> The crucial idea is to NOT start with classes, sets, or other
> constructions,
> which are not truly primitive.    (01)

>  The infant perceives objects, and situations
> (relationships among collections of objects and situations)
> differently as she
> learns more and more about these mysterious realities.    (02)

It takes a lot of learning to get to this stage.    (03)

The infant initially visually perceives patterns of light.  Light is
distinguished by color, brightness, and location in the visual field.
Some regions of the brain detect specific patterns such as parallel lines
and concentric disks.    (04)

There is no object detection at this point.    (05)

As the head moves the patterns move in the visual cortex.  Early learning
relates the patterns moving in the visual cortex to something external to
the head.  Motion of the head (when detected) causing motion of visual
patterns suggest a fixed existence of whatever causes the patterns.    (06)

Similar motions of portions of the visual field occur when the head is
not moving.  This suggests that whatever causes the patterns in the
limited sections of the visual field have some existence distinct from
whatever causes the patterns in other parts of the visual field.  This
seems to be the origin for the attribution of visual objecthood.  The
use of other senses helps ground such objecthood.    (07)

Further learning allows objecthood to be assigned to flexible connected
motions and continuous objecthood to be attributed to the source of
similarly moving patterns with a non-moving (or otherwise moving) region
in between (indicative of a separate object between the observer and the
moving object).    (08)

Multiple experiences with the same or similar objects allows for
classification of objects by type or individuality based on similarity
of properties of the visual experience.    (09)

> FK Maybe.
> Notice that I do not use concepts like partition, kind, type, etc.
> as they are
> not primitives to me. The primitives are still object, property and
> relation (associated with the dichotome facets above) and they are
> generated/produced by mental operations    (010)

Aren't objecthood and relations generated by mental operations?  Some
visual properties would be primitive, but most properties are assigned
to objects, and thus have to be generated by mental operations as well,
since the objects are.    (011)

> the proof for which is already available
> in dictionaries, lexicons, etc.
> But the problem is that the items in those collections (and in other
> repertories) are sorted morphologically (lexically, or alphabetically) on
> forms (names, objects) whereas we want a sort on content (properties)
> which are not available even as a cross reference!!    (012)

In an ontology, a sort on property cross reference would be available.    (013)

> Why? because the way such objects (concepts included)
> are generated and thus related is not documented - see  the
> debate on process vs. structure. And behind that debate we have the
> problem of representing verbs (change, motion)    (014)

Verbs are lexical creations.  They represent change (or stasis), including
change in position or orientations which is called motion.    (015)

I assume you are discussing the problem of representing change (or stasis)
instead of representing lexical components.    (016)

> in 2D, in a diagram, which by definition is not fit for the job.    (017)

I wonder what the definition of diagram is that you refer to.  It seems
to me that anything (including text) can be added to a diagram to provide
needed information.  Are you stating that change can not be described
in language?  Written language is 1D; so should be no more fit for the
job than a 2D representation.    (018)

-- doug    (019)

> My best regards, ferenc    (020)

doug foxvog    doug@xxxxxxxxxx   http://ProgressiveAustin.org    (021)

"I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
    - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
=============================================================    (022)

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    (023)

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