[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 07:56:54 -0400
Message-id: <4E3BDA86.4010808@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Matthew,    (01)

> ... the fact is that modal realism is an alternative approach
> to modality to the one you take. That much the same things
> can be achieved with either confirms that.    (02)

What you just said is almost exactly the approach I recommend.
I have repeatedly said that we should replace the philosopher's
jargon 'possible world' with 'possible model of the world.'    (03)

My only change is to delete the term 'realism', which is another
jargon term that philosophers have used in many different senses
over the years.  I believe that it's important to study philosophy,
but if you want to adopt any technical term, it's essential to
quote the exact definition by some particular philosopher from
whom you selected the term.    (04)

> I only claim [possible worlds] exist because I have made an
> ontological commitment to them, so I can talk about them.    (05)

I would like to go back to the word 'model', which is commonly
used in engineering and which is of the same nature as any
mathematical structure.  You can use an existential quantifier
that ranges over models, and it avoids an immense amount of
metaphysical confusion.    (06)

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    (07)

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