[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] 3D+1 (was presentism...was blah blah blah)

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Wacek Kusnierczyk <waku@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 11:16:20 -0600
Message-id: <4D4D85E4.3060204@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2/5/11 1:55 AM, doug foxvog wrote:
> On Fri, February 4, 2011 12:25, Wacek Kusnierczyk said:
>> On 2/4/11 11:10 AM, Yu Lin wrote:
>>>> What I said was that I don't know what the timestamp you mention would
>>>> be:
>>> Sorry,
>>> An instance in BFO has a timestamp.
>>> For example:
>>> In BFO, a Patient has a Quality of Elevated Temperature. (Capital
>>> letter in the first letter means the Class) [in this statement, all in
>>> class level, so there is no timestamp]
>>> for instantiate :
>>>    1. Mary (instance of Patient) had a temperature measured as 100F at
>>> 16:43:00 2001/01/11
>>>    2. Mary (same instance in 1) had a temperature measured as 90F at
>>> 12:00:00 2001/01/12
>>> I hope I make it clear for you.
>> Not really.  If *every* instance has a timestamp,
> The example suggests that what was meant was every statement instance --
> or possibly every temporal statement instance.  Yu Lin did not claim
> that *every* instance has a time stamp.  If *every* instance of *every*
> class had a time stamp, your statement below would be included.  However,
> that does not appear what Yu Lin meant.    (01)

She did not say *every*, and that's why I said "if *every*".  But she 
did say 'An instance in BFO has a timestamp', without selective 
qualification.  This made me explore the *every* case, but nowhere did I 
claim this is what Yu Lin meant.    (02)

In fact, earlier Yu Lin said "instance of a continuant can't avoid the 
fact the it bears a temporal stamp".  Note, in BFO, a quality *is* a 
continuant, by definition:    (03)

"Quality: A specifically dependent continuant 
[snap:SpecificallyDependentContinuant] that is exhibited if it inheres 
in an entity or entities at all (a categorical property)."    (04)

Following Yu Lin's explicit statement that a continuant instance cannot 
avoid to have a timestamp, the elevated temperature instance, which is 
in this example is explicitly a quality, must have a timestamp.  The 4D 
reading below simply follows.    (05)

My purpose here was not to affirm that the sentence should be read 3D, 
3D+1, or perhaps 4D.  It was to better understand what Yu Lin meant.  
I'm still not there.    (06)

>>   I'd expect something like
>> (Mary at t) has (a temperature 100f at t)
> This would be a 4D statement.  The provided statement was a 3D statement.    (07)

This indeed is a 4D statement, and I didn't say the provided statement 
was 4D.  What I meant, again, was that based on Yu Lin's own claim (a 
continuant instance has a timestamp), a quality being a continuant, and 
elevated temperature being a quality, then the reading should be as 
above.  This is not equivalent to saying I think this is correct, is it.    (08)

But, what sort of 3D do you mean?  This discussion started as a 
follow-up to Pat Hayes' post distinguishing 3D, 3D+1, and 4D ways of 
describing or modeling the reality.  My reading of the statement you 
comment on is that it is 3D+1 in Pat's classification, i.e., one of the 
form R(a, b, t), in this case, simplifying, has(mary, 100f, t).  If 
that's what you mean by 3D, we're in agreement.  If you rather mean 
Pat's 3D, we're rather not.    (09)

As a matter of fact, Yu Lin first said Cct is C(c)@t to her, which is 
the 3D view with time attached to sentences.  But she also said, "I 
agree with 4D approach".  So I don't know whether she'd read her 
temperature statement as 3D or 4D.  If you read my posts carefully (why 
would you), you'll see I state that to me the sentence is 3D+1, not the 
4D version discussed above.    (010)

>> because that temperature seems to be, in this framework, an *instance*
>> of the class Quality of Elevated Temperature.
> That class is not a temporal class and so should not have a timestamp.    (011)

I didn't say it was a temporal class.  But it's a quality, a continuant, 
and Yu Lin said a continuant cannot avoiding having a timestamp.    (012)

vQ    (013)

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    (014)

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