To: | ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
---|---|
From: | sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Date: | Wed, 20 Jul 2011 19:40:21 -0400 (EDT) |
Message-id: | <fa8d67430d18839d9de50dd24dbf5042.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Doug and Azamat, In every computer implementation and in every thought about possibilities, the word 'world' is a metaphor. Those so-called 'objects' are not physical worlds. They are descriptions in some computer notation or thoughts in some brain. The word 'context' is more appropriate because it avoids the confusions caused by calling them worlds. If you haven't yet read it, please, please, please read that article: http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/worlds.pdf John _________________________________________________________________ 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> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] intangibles, doug foxvog |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] intangibles (was RE: Why most classifications are fuzzy), sowa |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] intangibles, doug foxvog |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |