Doug, (01)
The definition of 'bachelor' as 'unmarried man' is a common example
that has been kicked around for years. I admit that I should have
stated that definition explicitly before discussing it further. (02)
> If Carnap accepted the meaning of "bachelor" as "ummarried man",
> then he should not be uncomfortable considering a priest... (03)
The example of the Pope as a bachelor is an example that has
also been discussed before, but not by Carnap. I just used it
to illustrate the kinds of complexities that can arise with
any attempt to formalize an informal notion. (04)
> The utility of microtheories is not only that conditions of the
> context can be assumed and thus not be required as conditions that
> must be added to rules, but that massive numbers of rules which
> are applicable to other microtheories would not be visible to the
> inference engine, simplifying search if one or more conditions of
> an irrelevant rule happen to match statements in the given context. (05)
I agree. I have strongly approved of the idea of a simple core
hierarchy and an open-ended collection of microtheories ever
since I heard the idea from Lenat & Guha back in 1991. (06)
In fact, I would simplify the core ever further. I have recommended
the "refrigerator principle" about axioms to include in the core: (07)
"When in doubt, throw it out." (08)
John (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)
|