To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:04:45 -0400 |
Message-id: | <AANLkTinfONDF4wMXBnj2cwK4w-OFw0Pu6n_so_cek=ap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Rich, I think the reason that Chris M has taken issue with your posts has been in your use of terminology. This is especially evident via the book you linked to: ( http://www.amazon.com/Unconscious-Infinite-Sets-Bi-logic-Maresfield/dp/1855752026/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1286932010&sr=8-1 ), which is hardly the standard sense in which "Logic" is used. Similarly for Higher Order Logic, it seems you take it to mean (and this is a very coarse interpretation) any system that transcends or is broader than what logicians and most other people refer to as logic.
From a didactic point of view, this can be especially confusing for someone who is new to the field. Again, from what I can glean, you are taking words that have been rather well defined and using them in non-standard ways. Now I can put a fairly reasonable interpretation on your use of these words by ignoring the rich history which those words are connected to, and some of what you say does sound reasonable, but I hope you can also appreciate how it can come off as misleading.
Now it might be useful while talking to you if someone were to use these phrases as you intend them; but were such a person to then try to converse with almost anyone else in the field - using the terms as you did - they would likely come off as quite ignorant due to their non-standard usage of the terms.
I must say, I appreciate Chris comments in clarifying what the standard interpretation of the terms you used actually are. This isn't to say you don't have something valuable to say, just that the phrasing can be highly misleading to and counterproductive for someone who is not well versed in the subject matter - thanks Chris!
Best, Ali On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Rich Cooper <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ 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) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled values for controlledvocabulary], Christopher Menzel |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled values for controlledvocabulary], Bill Andersen |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS forcontrolled values for controlledvocabulary], Rich Cooper |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled values for controlledvocabulary], Rich Cooper |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |