ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Sorted for ∃s and whizz (was Re: type free logic an

 To: "[ontolog-forum] " , Simon Spero Pat Hayes Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:30:51 -0500
 ``` On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:14 PM, Simon Spero wrote:    (01) > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > > I have been taken to task by some very competent logicians for calling CL >first-order, as they are using a purely syntactic criterion of order. Nobody >is right in debates like this[...] > > Nobody's right if everybody's wrong... > > But I didn't come here to talk order, law and or otherwise. I came here to >talk about CL, types/sorts, and syntax. All of the concrete syntactic sugar >to allow variables to be constrained to satisfy some one-place predicate. >However, the semantics are explicitly and deliberately designed so that type >errors lead to sentences which are always false, rather than being syntax >errors.    (02) Yes, that is correct.    (03) > Was a sorted dialect of CL ever proposed?    (04) In the early stages of the project, there was some enthusiasm for this idea, yes. However, as far as I know, nobody in the working group ever came up with a concrete proposal for a fully sorted logic. In order to be fully general, it would have to provide a general notation for defining the sorts and the sort constraints upon the arguments of all sorted relations, and relationships that hold between sorts. The major problem is that there is no single notion of a sorted logic, and no rational way to choose between the many alternatives. We could not agree, as I recall, on such matters as whether sorts should be allowed to form a hierarchy, whether or not overloading would be allowed (eg the binary relation Married whose arguments can be of sort (male, female) or (female, male) but not - bear in mind this was several years ago - (male, male) or (female, female) ). On balance, since the proponents of a sorted logic were not able to agree on even the most basic decisions which need to be settled before a logic could even be designed, the decision was taken to make the logic unsorted. This was in any case in line with the emerging sense that the purpose of CL would be best served by making the logic have as few syntactic constraints as possible, what Chris Menzel once called 'wild west syntax', which is about as far from a typed logic as one can get.    (05) This was several years ago, so is based upon recollection. Others who were involved may remember other details.    (06) Pat    (07) > > Simon > > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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    (08) ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes    (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) ```
 Current Thread [ontolog-forum] Sorted for ∃s and whizz (was Re: type free logic and higher order quantification), Simon Spero Re: [ontolog-forum] Sorted for ∃s and whizz (was Re: type free logic and higher order quantification), Pat Hayes <= Re: [ontolog-forum] Sorted for ∃s and whizz (was Re: type free logic and higher order quantification), John F. Sowa [ontolog-forum] New Enterprise and IT Taxonomies, Frank Guerino Re: [ontolog-forum] New Enterprise and IT Taxonomies, Tom Knorr Re: [ontolog-forum] New Enterprise and IT Taxonomies, Frank Guerino [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, doug foxvog [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, doug foxvog [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, doug foxvog Re: [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, Rich Cooper Re: [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, Ron Wheeler Re: [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology, John F. Sowa