[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] intangibles (was RE: Why most classifications are fu

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 06:17:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <3d97689b9fec01d9a8c60839ccedfe3c.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Dear Matthew,

The point I'm trying to make is that possible worlds don't exist.  They are imaginary.  The way you imagine them is to create some hypothesis, theory, axioms, or specifications that generate them.

The so-called extensional methods are superfluous.  Whatever hypothesis you formed to generate the possible worlds contains all the information necessary to derive whatever conclusion you could get by analyzing the set of worlds.

In short, the starting  hypothesis is intensional.  The possible worlds are useless baggage.  They might give you some pleasure in your imagination.  They might even be useful as illustrations.  But the method of forming the initial specification for the worlds is intensional.


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    (01)

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