[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and kantian propositions

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 13:23:48 -0500
Message-id: <B97DE479-9278-443C-9142-ECA5A61AF1C8@xxxxxxxx>
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)

-chris    (03)

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    (04)

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