On Aug 6, 2011, at 10:02 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> 2. A statement is analytically true iff its truth follows from
> the meaning of the terms in it.
> Ex: "Everything red is colored."
> "If a cat is on a mat, then an animal is on something."
> "If Benedict is a bachelor, then Benedict is unmarried."
> Many people are trying to use ontology to define the background
> knowledge that would be sufficient to determine the analytically
> true statements about the terms in their domain of interest.
> However, many people (not just Quine) have observed that there
> are many problematical issues. For example, Pope Benedict is
> unmarried, but most people would not call him a bachelor. (01)
Seems to me that that example only shows that there is more to the definition
of *bachelor* than "unmarried man" -- perhaps something like "unmarried man who
is not prevented from marrying by civil or religious law". It doesn't show
that there is anything "problematic" about the notion of analyticity. (02)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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 (04)