To: | "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Len Yabloko <lenyabloko@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 29 Jun 2012 18:57:11 -0700 (PDT) |
Message-id: | <1341021431.61194.YahooMailNeo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Friday, June 29, 2012 7:51 PM William Frank wrote: >This mail from John Sowa below attributes to *me* the very statement that I am attempting, et again, to explain is irrational, because circular. Then, his mail changes that irrational statement into a well known and incontroverable assertion, and the mail and argues against what I said *as if* I was attacking that second statement, and saying IT was circular. Again, I did not write what John says I wrote below, I wrote entirely the opposite. I do not understand how this misquote could have occurred, and then the mistquote attacked. John's points, in attacking his straw man, of course, are entirely correct, and I nor anyone else with knowledge of the theory of definition would disagree with them. Bill, I understand your dismay. This kind of disconnect happens all the time when context of statements is shifting. What I see happened in this exchange is that original context of "truth", as it is used in logic and ontology, has changed to "truth" as it used in the ordinary circumstances, which is what Ron called "application of truth in the real world". What you objected as "circularity and its consequent infinite regresses" on the other hand, is only applicable in logical systems such as computer programs. Somehow real world manages not to fall apart facing these logical inconsistencies. Even more, the real world applications must operate in that environment and add some value to it which is what Ron was saying (I think). Then John Sowa switched back to context of formal logic and notes that the original statement needs to be changed to qualify for such context. After adjusting it for logic the statement degenerated into nothing. This is what often happens to statements when they are taken out of the context. But again, in the real world this problem has many solutions. The challenge for logic and ontology is to find a way to manage contexts together with statements and to provide a better solutions to this problem. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:16 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- William Frank 413/376-8167 _________________________________________________________________ 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> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth, William Frank |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth, Ron Wheeler |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth, William Frank |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth, Ron Wheeler |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |