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

[sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Pat,

Possible worlds don't exist.  This  world is all we have.

PC
> I have used the notio0n of "possible world" to include *any* possible
> world,
> whether hypothetical, counterfactual, future projection, part of a belief
> system, etc., as well as possible actual physical universes (in a
> multiverse) other than our own that really exist. It's a useful notion.

To avoid confusion, I recommend the following terminology:

   'possible world'  =>  'model of a possible way the world could be'

This transformation clarifies the ontological status.  But it's usually better to use a term like 'context' that bypasses the confusions.

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)