"An ontology of self-interest should include all needs..." (01)
This is two orthogonal things.
Needs, fundamental, psychological, spiritual, ethical, social, cultural,
necessary and sufficent conditions for human living.
Humans advance science, technology and industry to create more wealth, thus
to overcome social injustice and social ills prevalent today-hunger,
poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, diseases, wars, environment degradation,
and many other badnesses. These problems still continue because of the
dominant economic and political self-interests, the main source of social
evils. The mainstream (unenlightened self-interest) insists that the persons
who act to further his self-interests ultimately serve the public interests.
The "enlightened self-interest" opposes: the persons who act to further the
interests of others (or the interests of the group or groups to which they
belong), ultimately serve their own self-interests. A dilemma, a big social
quandary which mothered two polar types of human society: capitalism and
I believe these human issues are more actual than the talks about the
microorganisms self-interests, like the pathogens are more egoistic, while
the harmless micro-organisms, as intestinal flora, look more altruistic
creatures :). (02)
"What are the various trade-offs that cause some people to be libertarians,
others to be socialists, others to be progressives, others to be various
of conservatives or liberals."
Your Worldview, Philosophy, Belief, Values, and Religion. Ultimately, the
scope and level of your knowledge. Since there are universal truths of
society to be recognized by any social movements. One of them: the lack of
social cohesion (material needs and conditions; order, safety and freedom;
social networks and interactions; social inclusion and integration;
equality, equity and life chances) is a principal reason of social
Azamat Abdoullaev (03)
----- Original Message -----
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 1:08 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology going offline (04)
> An ontology of self-interest should include all needs, at the base and
> of Maslow's hierarchy. I would also include Manfred Max-Neef's set of
> "fundamental human needs", which overlaps Maslow's hierarchy. Max-Neef
> includes qualities, things to have, actions, interactions, and settings
> in his "Human Scale Development".
> On Thu, August 11, 2011 3:58, matthew lange said:
>> I follow the conversation of a self-interest ontology, with great self
>> interest. I would be happy to be included in its continued discourse,
>> would be even more delighted if the ontology focused on lower levels of
>> Maslow's hierarchy of needs, in terms of survival--with special attention
>> aimed at characterizing fitness as composed by a person's trajectory
>> desired metabolic, physical, emotional, cognitive and ??? phenotypes.
> Merely dealing with survival needs will not provide the terminology
> necessary to explain (or rationalize) human action. What are the
> various trade-offs that cause some people to be libertarians, others to
> be socialists, others to be progressives, others to be various flavors
> of conservatives or liberals. The right would label the left (and itself)
> differently than the left would. It would be interesting to explain this
> using formal ontologies.
> -- doug f
>> Does this sound doable?
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Rich Cooper
>>> Dear John,
>>> I agree; ontology of self interest should be part
>>> of the list topic catalog, however, examples,
>>> including political ones, are needed to illustrate
>>> points in self interest. For example, we four
>>> have divergent viewpoints on nearly every
>>> political issue we raised in the forum, and I
>>> don't see how we can avoid such examples in the
>>> future. So the problem remains; many people
>>> simply can't discuss political issues (or other
>>> self interest issues) that impinge on their self
>>> worth. That is what I regard as the problem we
>>> had on the list.
>>> If you have suggestions about how to do that
>>> without upsetting people like Chris Menzel, I
>>> would be happy to entertain it. But it wasn't
>>> ONLY Chris, at least a couple of others preferred
>>> to avoid it.
>>> Or maybe we can convince Peter to split off a
>>> second list that relates to self interest
>>> specifically - that would be easier anyway than
>>> having political (or other self-interest) issues
>>> discussed in an open forum where people get upset.
>>> I have no desire to be involved in flames or name
>>> calling, and would prefer that we discuss it in a
>>> way that doesn't create the opportunity for such.
>>> But if you believe we can discuss it without
>>> getting into politics (I remain unconvinced still)
>>> I am game to try it a bit more.
>>> How do the other two of us feel about this?
>>> Should we go back to the list, or is it too
>>> problematic to do so.
>>> Rich Cooper
>>> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>>> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: John F. Sowa [mailto:sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:14 PM
>>> To: Rich Cooper
>>> Cc: '[ontolog-forum] '; AzamatAbdoullaev; doug
>>> Subject: Re: Self Interest Ontology going offline
>>> There is nothing wrong about an ontology that
>>> includes concepts
>>> such as SelfInterest. That would be an important
>>> part of any
>>> ontology that includes purposive action of any
>>> The complaints were about political issues, which
>>> don't belong
>>> on this forum.
>>> As I said, the issues about self interest for
>>> humans belong
>>> to the issue of self interest for any living
>>> things, and it
>>> should be part of the same ontology. That is
>>> a topic for Ontolog Forum.
>>> 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
>> 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
> doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org
> "I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
> initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
> - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
> 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
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 (06)