ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] metaphysis, semantics and the research program of on

To: <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:31:34 -0700
Message-id: <D74164CDDAFE4871AFC1720495329BE9@Gateway>

Dear Doug,

 

My comments are interspersed below,

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

 

 

On Mon, March 26, 2012 17:12, Rich Cooper wrote:

>[doug foxvog] and I wrote:

> 

> RC:> One way to view context is as a collection of

> > properties and relations

> > about a situation.  In that view, context is

> > possibly physical, and

> > possibly conceptual, but not necessarily either.

 

> DF:>I meant that a context is a conceptual

> construct.  It seems that you are

> referring to the physical definition of the

> context, which i referred to

> in the next sentence.

 

It seems to me that a context, which may be a conceptual construct, is simply a way of describing what is salient about the situation.  I am not (at least not intentionally) referring to the physical aspect any more than the conceptual or social (or whatever other categories can be identified). 

 

Context is the identification of the objects, properties, relationships and actions that are represented in a set of situations, IMHO.  What is done with, to or for the context depends entirely on the application, IMHO. 

 

>> RC:> For example, if I am recording objects and

>> their properties in a database, then a query

 

> DF:>A query is a conceptual object and has a

> conceptual structure.  If the

> query is seen as merely a string of 1s and 0s, it

> can not be used until

> it is interpreted to have some meaning by mapping

> it to some conceptual structure.

 

Why do you consider a query to ALWAYS be conceptual?  It seems much less black and white to me.  Queries can have to do with retrieving proofs of the query’s underlying assumptions.  Some queries will return empty sets, while others return the situations that have been encountered somewhere in the database. 

 

RC:

> The word "context" is widely used in computer

> science to mean all the information required to

> perform some function(s).

 

I think you are referring to a "task context" here.

 

A task context is one type of context, but only one.  A design context identifies constraints within which a design must be configured.  A communication context identifies what linguistic concerns have been expressed by the participants.  An educational context relates to the sources of information and to the ways in which that information appears. 

 

I am referring to something else, an "ontological

context", which has been discussed a lot on the

ontolog forum.  It refers to the state of affairs in which

some set of statements is true.  It can be modeled as

an ontological object, for example a Cyc #$Microtheory.

 

OK

 

>  For example, [android.content.Context]

 

Here, you are referencing a Java Class i have never heard of.  Yes, people often name objects and classes in object-oriented languages with English words.  However, that does not mean that in normal conversation, someone using one of those words means every specific piece of code that someone has happened to assign that name to.

 

Agreed

 

> I am curious; why do you feel that a context is

> conceptual any more than some other glob of memory

> which, as you say, has to be interpreted to be

> useful?

 

A glob of memory is not a conceptual thing.  A representational object modeled by that glob of memory is a conceptual thing. A context -- in the context of this forum 8)# -- is not a glob of memory.  However, in some languages it can be modeled to a certain extent by a formatted data structure.  And that structure can be encoded in a glob of memory (or an unlimited number of globs of memory).

 

While the glob of memory is not conceptual, it contains representations, but those representations could simply be designations to other things, conceptual, physical and social among others. 

 

Note:

* The memory is physical information bearing object.

 

True

 

* The data structure is a non-physical pattern and can be

   instantiated in an unlimited number of memory objects.

 

I consider the pattern to be physical in that it is stored in a physical substrate, such as electronic memory.

 

·        The represented thing (the context) is in this case non-physical.  It can be represented by a large number of data structures in a large number of representational systems.

OK

 

The information bearing object, the data structure, and the

represented thing are all different things -- and different types of things.

 

True

 

In CycL, the memory is an instance of #$InformationBearingObject (which is a subclass of #$InformationBearingThing which covers events, such #$SingingAnAria as well as objects).  The data

structure is an instance of #$AbstractInformationStructure, and the Context is an instance of neither.

 

-- doug

 

Thanks for your thoughtful post,

-Rich

 

> -Rich

> 

> 

> 

> Sincerely,

> 

> Rich Cooper

> 

> EnglishLogicKernel.com

> 

> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

> 

> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On

> Behalf Of doug foxvog

> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 8:10 AM

> To: '[ontolog-forum] '

> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] metaphysis, semantics

> and the research program of ontologies

> 

> 

> 

> On Sun, March 25, 2012 13:52, Rich Cooper wrote:

> 

>> doug foxvog wrote:

> 

> 

> 

>>> Or course, what can be physically measured

> depends upon context.  In

> 

>>> various contexts, things beyond a certain

> (temporal or linear) scale would

> 

>>> be out of context and not part of that

> context's physical reality.  And,

> 

>>> of course, context is a conceptual, not

> physical concept -- although it

> 

>>> may be given a physical definition.

> 

> 

> 

>> One way to view context is as a collection of

> properties and relations

> 

>> about a situation.  In that view, context is

> possibly physical, and

> 

>> possibly conceptual, but not necessarily either.

> 

> 

> 

> I meant that a context is a conceptual construct.

> It seems that you are

> 

> referring to the physical definition of the

> context, which i referred to

> 

> in the next sentence.

> 

> 

> 

>> For example, if I am recording objects and their

> properties in a database,

> 

>> then a query

> 

> 

> 

> A query is a conceptual object and has a

> conceptual structure.  If the

> 

> query is seen as merely a string of 1s and 0s, it

> can not be used until

> 

> it is interpreted to have some meaning by mapping

> it to some conceptual

> 

> structure.

> 

> 

> 

>> which returns a situation description may have

> either

> 

>> conceptual structure (if they are MY concepts

> that were recorded) or

> 

>> physical structure (if the returned values are

> solely physical SENSOR

> 

>> measurements).

> 

> 

> 

> Sure.  The conceptual context may include in its

> physical definition a

> 

> conceptually selected time frame and a

> conceptually selected set of

> 

> sensors and their readings.  The individual

> readings may be more than

> 

> merely binary values, but given a conceptual

> meaning, for example,

> 

> temperature in degrees Kelvin, pressure in

> Pascals, time in milliseconds

> 

> offset from T0, etc.

> 

> 

> 

>> In actual practice, a context can mix both

> physical and subjective

> 

>> ('conceptual' if you prefer) estimates of

> reality, and usually does in

> 

>> most practical database applications.

> 

> 

> 

> I do not use 'conceptual' to mean 'subjective'.

> 

> 

> 

> I think that this is really the key to the

> discussion.

> 

> 

> 

> I define 'conceptual' as something that is a

> construct of one or more minds.

> 

> 

> 

>> So, IMHO, situations are every bit as slippery

> and subjective as concepts.

> 

>>  Situations are just more articulated since they

> usually comprise both

> 

>> concepts and sensor readings.

> 

> 

> 

> First, i was not considering contexts to be

> situations.  They are quite

> 

> different things.

> 

> 

> 

> Having said that, i agree that situations are

> slippery concepts.  Their

> 

> boundaries are subjective.  The temporal and

> spatial limits of a storm

> 

> are defined arbitrarily.  What situations and

> events count as subevents

> 

> or sub-situations of a war?  How are breaks in

> thought considered when

> 

> examining the situation of my responding to this

> email?

> 

> 

> 

> -- doug

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> -Rich

> 

>> 

> 

>> 

> 

>> 

> 

>> Sincerely,

> 

>> 

> 

>> Rich Cooper

> 

>> 

> 

>> EnglishLogicKernel.com

> 

>> 

> 

>> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

> 

>> 

> 

>> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

> 

>> ...

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> __________________________________________________

> _______________

> 

> 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

> 

> 

> 

> 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________

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    (01)

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