Rich, John: (01)
Another thing to keep in mind is that conceptual reality includes things
like countries and corporations and driver's licenses. It's not just about
representing concepts in logic - it's about representing the reality that
human society has created around these concepts. Society hasn't just created
the concept of a corporation - it has created millions of actual
corporations - not detectable in physical reality other than through
surrogates (i.e., the IBM corporation is NOT the building in Armonk -which
could be sold tomorrow - or any of its myriad other physical possessions).
How does one detect and represent such conceptual realities in "cyberspace"?
Where is most of your money in physical reality? Not in your mattress, I
suspect, nor in gold bars or other physically detectable manifestations.
Heck, most people don't even get stock certificates anymore. How do we
represent the conceptual reality of your money in cyberspace? Or the Prime
Meridian? You won't see in in satellite photographs of the Earth or pick it
up on radar. But we sure behave as if it were there and it most definitely
used by Google Maps and Google Earth, among many many other systems. So
where do we go in cyberspace to access these conceptual realities? What are
the "authoritative" sources for these various realities if we can't rely on
our own senses, or radars, temperature sensors, or other physical reality
sensors to obtain this information about our environment ourselves. And what
biases are introduced by the sources we select? Will some corporations
"disappear" from some of our sources because "Anonymous" has some run in
with them? Or because some religious group doesn't like them? Social reality
is created by the particular social context and scope we select as the
primary source of information about conceptual reality, this forum being a
case in point. (02)
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 9:22 PM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] metaphysis, semantics and the research program
of ontologies (03)
Actually, talking about "conceptual" versus physical or social types is
essential to constructing a design for an ontology implementation. How to
represent something that is conceptual versus physical or social is a
tightly coupled design decision with responsiveness, throughput, and
resource requirements. That's from the engineering point of view. (04)
>From the validity point of view, I have suggested
that all concepts are recorded by subjective
person(s) and that subjectivity remains in those persons who did NOT record
concepts. The validity of a conceptualization is proven by having other
users, both actual and prospective, tell you that they like the results or
they do not like them.
Since I claim that ontologies are recorded by subjective agents (persons,
whatever ..), it is unlikely that other persons of different experiences
will be fully comfortable with most conceptualizations. No matter how
theoretically pure and historic a conceptualization is, it also has to be
useful to the audience for which it is intended. It has to work and work
properly for the users in order to be a valid conceptualization. (05)
JMHO,
-Rich (06)
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (07)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 5:18 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] metaphysis, semantics and the research program
of ontologies (08)
Folks, (09)
In philosophy, metaphysics and ontology are often considered synonymous. (010)
Much of this discussion deals with issues that are on the borderline of
logic and ontology. Questions about contexts are among them. (011)
Talk about whether or not something is
"conceptual" is not helpful.
It is much more appropriate to cite examples from the literature about how
various researchers and implementers have used logic and computational
logics to represent those topics. (012)
John (013)
__________________________________________________
_______________
Message Archives:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
orum/
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?WikiHomePa
ge#nid1J (014)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|