[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Universal Basic Semantic Structures

To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:10:36 -0400
Message-id: <CALuUwtB96Vi8JC0HxofJE6k0rL8u7X0uQhA7hALjBTbMDPnOkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"all things shall??? be classified".  See below.

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:15 PM, doug foxvog <doug@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, September 26, 2012 08:53, Andries van Renssen wrote:
> On 10 september 2012 at 20:41  doug foxvog wrote:
>> On Thu, September 6, 2012 16:39, Andries van Renssen wrote:

>> > Furthermore, the statement is that all individual things 'shall be'
>> > classified, whereas that is not required for kinds of things.

>> This is a rule in your system.  Kingsley asked "what is not to like"
>> about this text snippet.
>> The lack of requirement that kinds of things need not
>> be classified is something that falls in this category since the lack
>> of classification limits the type of reasoning that can be performed.

> [AvR] The statement that "all individual things 'shall be' classified" is
> indeed a rule. Semantically it is not a necessity in Formal English,
> because expressions can be interpreted without it.
> However, I think it is a valuable rule, because it adds possibilities
> for verification of the correctness (consistency) of expressions.
> Therefore, the rule is intended as a (strong) recommendation.

Agreed.  The statement "all things 'shall be' classified" is a stronger
rule.  IMO, it is valuable because it adds more possibilities for
verification of the correctness (consistency) of expressions than
the more limited rule that you state.

 Try to imagine a thing you could not classify at all.  I just can't.  Please describe such a thing you have imagined to me.

Is it a living thing, or an inaimate thing?    Won't you be able to tell at some point, if not yet?  Is it a solid or a gas or a liquid or a combination?  Is it possible that you can recognize it as a thing, any yet are, in principle, not able to tell what kind of thing it is? 

here is a thing.  How do you know it is one thing, and not two, or a half a thing?

What does this tell you about this "rule."
William Frank


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>