[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:25:32 -0400
Message-id: <4E57C8FC.1020901@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 8/26/2011 11:34 AM, AzamatAbdoullaev wrote:
> With my respect to Doug's effort, giving usually very interesting
> contribution, the least that we need is to "cyc" things here, like
> "interest - temporalstufftype; self-interest-temporalstufftype;
> agent-exisitng agenttype, etc.". Besides, its top ontology is too weak
> haphazard.    (01)

I admit that I have never been happy with Cyc's upper level.  To say
that Interest is a kind of TemporalStuffType is much too weak.  It omits
fundamental relationships of interest to purpose, goals, and intentions.    (02)

But I also agree with Doug Lenat that the most useful inferences come
from the mid levels and lower levels.  We should have an upper level
that provides more guidance to anyone who is defining lower levels.
But it's also important to avoid putting so many axioms into the
upper level that they create inconsistencies with axioms needed
at the lower levels.    (03)

What Doug F. has done is to show how a given upper level (namely Cyc's)
can be used as a basis for specifying and relating mid-level concepts.
That analysis is useful, and it can be adapted to other upper levels,
but it's important to develop such a level.    (04)

As we have seen, it is very hard to get any consensus on the upper
levels.  And I believe that there are multiple reasons why.  But that
is an issue that requires a lot more analysis.    (05)

> Briefly, we need just a sensible ontology of self-interest open to a wide
> public as well as machines.    (06)

I would agree, but I don't believe that you can specify self interest
without a general treatment of many other interrelated concepts.
Following is an article in which I analyze those issues:    (07)

    The Role of Logic and Ontology in Language and Reasoning    (08)

On the other hand, I also believe that it's useful to analyze the
relationships among the mid-level concepts, as Doug F. has done.    (09)

John    (010)

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    (011)

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