[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] using SKOS for controlled values for controlled voca

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx
From: Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-id: <301302.59667.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Well Dr. Sowa's explanation about FOL, SOL. HOL in context of Set theory is very clear.. ( It establishes the subset relationships between them in a clear manner..   ( for all those Dr. Sowa's fans in this group..) .  But FOL, SOL, HOL are abstract representation that allows grouping of elements  and  relationships.  Set Theory is the basis for Entity Relation and Object Oriented  notations as well..  All these are tools to represent information, using the rules  from the real world.  ( natural and made up ones like policy etc ).   But still they are tools as Leo Obrst said. ( But mathematical logic alone does not explain everything in the universe, one needs to include science and other disciplines..)
 ( But,  I am a supporter of set theory , it is easy to remember )  ! It is a required course for CS 101 level too...

By 'logic' Wittgenstein meant "the study of everything subject to rules" (TLP 6.3). And the rules for using our language -- including the rules of sense and nonsense -- he called 'grammar'.

So linguists and Computer Science and other disciples have different kind of logic to deal with ..

I think that may be cause for difference in thinking and all the arguments


--- On Tue, 10/12/10, Phil Murray <pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Phil Murray <pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] using SKOS for controlled values for controlled vocabulary
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Pavithra" <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 2010, 6:40 PM

Pavithra wrote:
>>  LO: I don't think that NL *is* logic, or ontology *is* logic. I think that
>> logic and mathematics, >i.e., formalization, is one of our best tools
>> for advancing understanding about phenomena >of the world.

> I think that is the best observation that I read today in this forum.

I disagree. Your question,

> Isn't grammar the logic of the language? The verbs and the nouns and
> what should follow what?? )

... is even better. Simple, but very important and often ignored.

> Please continue, this has been an interesting reading..

I agree wholeheartedly.

Phil Murray


The Semantic Advantage
Turning Information into Assets

Blog: http://semanticadvantage.wordpress.com
Web site: http://www.semanticadvantage.com

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    (01)

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