On Jul 6, 2011, at 1:38 PM, AzamatAbdoullaev wrote:
> John wrote: "And a warning: Unless you can find an immutable law of nature
> that creates a classification, don't expect it to be a solid
> foundation for a "standard ontology".
> Agree. Here are five methodogical rules from the standard ontology:
> 1. Class is determined by a single property;
> 2. Kind is determined by a set of properties; (01)
Unless you give us a theory of properties, this is not a useful distinction.
It seems at least to follow that every Class is a Kind. For if class C is
determined by property P, then kind K is determined by set {P}. And every Kind
is a class if, for any set S of properties, it follows that there is a property
that is the conjunction of S. Do you have a theory of properties on which
these apparent implications do, or do not, follow? (02)
> 3. Natural Kind is determined by a set of lawfully related properties (laws); (03)
What makes two properties "lawfully related"? (04)
> 4. Natural Genus is the set of things sharing a basic law; (05)
What is it for two things to "share a basic law"? And what makes a law basic? (06)
> 5. Natural Species is the set of things sharing a particular law. (07)
What is it for two things to "share a particular law"? (08)
Chris Menzel (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|