ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Ron Wheeler <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 19:52:37 -0400
Message-id: <4FEE3FC5.3060600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 29/06/2012 4:16 PM, John F Sowa wrote:
> On 6/29/2012 3:03 PM, William Frank wrote:
>> 'p' is true if and only if I believe 'p' is true
>>
>> reflects the actual application of "truth" in the real world.
>>
>> Then the real world goes in for circularity and its consequent infinite
>> regresses.
> Two points:
>
>    1. The phrase "I believe" does not belong there.  Truth does not depend
>       on what anybody believes.
>
>    2. The statement without the phrase "I believe" says nothing at all
>       about the world.  It merely defines the conditions for using
>       the word 'true'.
>
> All definitions are true by definition.  They don't make any claims
> about the world.  There is no regress of any kind, finite or infinite.
This reduces the scope of ontology to a very small set of domains.
For most domains, including science and mathematics, believe and 
consensus of belief, forms what we accept as true.    (01)

It is almost inconceivable that one could create anything except the 
most trivial ontology without getting into areas of disagreement about 
what constitutes a "true statement" or definition.
I would love to see someone attempt to define  the "truth" about the 
role of government or even an analysis of the US constitution, the 
Vietnam war, the
history of Iran, the biology of human life and on and on.    (02)

What we believe today about biology is vastly different than what was 
the "truth" one hundred years ago and will probably be regarded as 
completely silly one hundred years from now.
It is almost impossible to say what the "truth" about the VIetnam war to 
Americans and I am sure that the Chinese and Vietnamese would question 
some of the nicely define ontological statements that we would write.    (03)

In this forum it is hard to get agreement about almost any "truth" in 
ontology. Some views are more acceptable than other but to call all of 
them them "truths" is not possible.    (04)

What the SMEs and ontologists write needs to be internally consistent 
but to expect truth is too much.    (05)

Ron    (06)



> 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
>   
>    (07)


-- 
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102    (08)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (09)

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