[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] FW: Self Interest Ontology - Bacteria Use Case 1

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Richard Vines" <plessons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:42:42 +1000
Message-id: <002701cc5cc2$03180b60$09482220$@netspace.net.au>
Avril,    (01)

I think I have misunderstood this:    (02)

Let property P_{n} be composed of two level n-1 properties J_{n-1} and  
K_{n-1}, which are related by the relation R:    (03)

P_{n}=R(J_{n-1},K_{n-1})    (04)

I told you I was not an ontologist per se, ... I skip read this to mean 
(J_{n-1} times K_{n-1}).     (05)

So I was talking at cross purposes I think because I thought you were trying to 
take into account all possible relationships between different properties J and 
K  -thus my reference to the word universal in this quote from myself.    (06)

"I like the idea of “focal level” in hierarchy theory because it does not 
pretend to be universal".    (07)

Apologies for this. So, I also take back my comment also about utility.    (08)

Thanks,    (09)

Richard     (010)

-----Original Message-----
From: Avril Styrman [mailto:Avril.Styrman@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 17 August 2011 6:14 AM
To: [ontolog-forum] ; Richard Vines
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] FW: Self Interest Ontology - Bacteria Use Case 1    (011)

Hi Richard,    (012)

> The only problem I have is more to do with semantics and the real 
> world application. I am not an ontologist per se, but for me knowledge 
> work needs to be contextual. Thus, axioms need to be constrained and 
> their creation based on what I call practical applications of human 
> interpretative intelligence.    (013)

One example of how the level hierarchy can help in contextualization is that 
some axioms may apply only on some one particular level or on some levels, but 
not on others.    (014)

> Thus, although I am out of my depth here, it is not clear to me what  
> is useful about “the identification of levels – in that it clarifies  
> the ontology of properties”.    (015)

I'm not especially concentrating on computer science ontology, and it  
is easier to answer what is useful about the identification of levels  
elsewhere.    (016)

The level hierarchy can be clearly found everywhere in nature. I quote  
Sowa's slide 63 http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/iss.pdf: Ontology: The  
study of what exists and how it can be formally described and  
axiomatized.    (017)

So, if I achieve to spell out the minimal axiomatization of something  
very general, then that clarifies the ontology of properties. But what  
is the utility of the ontology of properties? I hope it has utility,  
since if it does not have, then that part of e.g. D.M. Armstrong's and  
David Bohm's work has no utility, and I've been misguided for many  
years, for who would like to do something that has no utility? The  
ontology of properties is an undeniable part of philosophical  
ontology, and it can be asked even more generally that what is the  
utility of philosophical ontology?    (018)

Suppose that someone has managed to spell out the logical skeleton S  
of something that prevails everywhere. Then consider another theory T  
that is in contradiction with S. If we already know that S is true,  
then we can say that T is not true, at least not in the respect in  
which it is in contradiction with S. Then again, suppose that S and T  
are both true, and explain exactly the same thing and nothing else.  
Then it comes down to which one is more economical.    (019)

So, the utility of an ideal physicalist-economical ontology is at  
least that it helps to identify theories that are without  
physicalist-economical grounds.    (020)

-Avril    (021)

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    (022)

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