On Fri, August 26, 2011 14:00, AzamatAbdoullaev said:
> John:
>> "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." (01)
> That's really significant. It's necessary to define if an interest is a
> form
> of reason, a final cause, the sake, goal, end, result or objective to
> pursue and obtain. (02)
I defined an interest as a type of situation in the ontology. (03)
The problem with defining it as a form of reason is the common idea
that certain people don't know what their interests really are. (04)
One can certainly reason about one's own (or someone else's) perceived
interests. One can make it a goal/objective to pursue the interest and
satisfy it. One can do something for the sake of the interest. (05)
> How its related to need, motive, motivation, and morality. (06)
Satisfying a physiological need would be in a person's interest. A
person can have other needs -- ones to achieve various goals. A person
could set a goal which is not actually in his/her own interest. The
needs of such goals are not necessarily in the person's interest. (07)
People often have motives and motivation to satisfy their interests. (08)
One's non-physiological interests may be moral or not. That seems to
be an orthogonal concept. However, many people deem/find it in their
interest to act in a moral manner. (09)
> At
> which reality it emerges, biological reality, cognitive reality or social
> reality. (010)
There would be interests at each level. We could subcategorize interests
as BiologicalInterest, CognitiveInterest, SocialInterest, etc. (011)
> What the key types of self-interest are, individual, familial,
> tribal, corporate, group, or national. (012)
I did mention these. (013)
> All these and other things are overwhelmingly important. As we know, the
> whole geopolitics and international relations are guided by the national
> self-interests (mercantilism), balancing the national self-interests of
> several big powers. (014)
I defined some relations for ranking one's different interests. Different
theories would have different rules for comparing them. (015)
> The Libian tragedy you mentioned before is looked by many stakeholders
> more
> as a mercantile enterprise pursuing all sorts of self-interests and
> ambitions: individual, tribal,..., or "reason of the state". Its also
> critical to see why the real issues as the rule of law, public good,
> morality and collective security appear less valuable then self-interests. (016)
One could try to model the many competing interests of the various players
and model the relative ranking of interests of each player. In that
players might revise their relative rankings of interests, it would
be hard to keep such a model current. (017)
> It appears a real ontology of self-interest is of global social
> importance as well. (018)
It could be used to argue that an opponents "true" interests would be
better served if they took another course or to argue for the immorality
of an opponent's relative ranking of different interests. Such arguments
could be used to try to convince the public in a democratic society to
get their representatives to change course. (019)
Whether people would actually be persuaded by logic, is another matter. (020)
-- doug (021)
> Azamat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 7:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Partial interest ontology
>
>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>> Briefly, we need just a sensible ontology of self-interest open to a
>>> wide
>>> public as well as machines.
>>
>> 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:
>>
>> http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/rolelog.pdf
>> The Role of Logic and Ontology in Language and Reasoning
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
> (022)
=============================================================
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (023)
"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.
============================================================= (024)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (025)
|