Ferenc,
I am trying to show an example of a
nonphysical object (ownership of a car, and records of that ownership in a
database) in relationships with a physical one. If I can figure out how you
and Doug view the situation in its component parts, I will have a better idea
of your semantics re physical and mental objects. That is the only point I
wanted to make with this example,
-Rich
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
From:
ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of FERENC KOVACS
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010
3:24 AM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] do
not trust quantifiers
Rich: What about situations that comprise
both physical and nonphysical objects,
such as the filled-out title of my car?
Rich, (resubmitted)
As I said before "everything is
subject to chunking"
I am not sure what a title of a your car
is, but I assume it is a document certifying that you are the owner of a
particular car. Whether it is empty or filled-out would not reclassify the
physical document as a physical and non-physical one, nor does it matter that
it refers to a "real car"
As a document it is an object and it has
properties that you can list. Do you want me to continue?
If you refer to ownership (title) as
non physical, yet represented by the document, it is not a problem. Neither is
colour "physical", only red, blue and green are.....
In my interpretation the filled-out title
of your car is just an object, not a situation. It is another issue that it has
been changed and you see the result of that change in an object. But you canot
grasp the filling out of the title as far as I can see, neither as an object,
nor as a situation.
|