Hi, (01)
discrete mereology is the simplest flat collection theory. I inform
the list of a new article by Rom Harré: Behind the mereological
fallacy. Philosophy, 87(341):329–352, 2012. (02)
According to Harre p351-2 mereology’s lack of the ability to model
contexts has led to mereological fallacies, where contexts are
confusingly mixed:
“the brain is not a part of a person in the way that a grain of sand
is part of a beach. It is part of a person’s body and a person’s body
is not a part of that person in the relevant sense.” In contrast, when
a granular theory is used as a foundation of ‘part’, this
automatically makes the user to think more
carefully about the context under which the term ‘part’ is used: some
parts are flat, some are granular. (03)
Granular theories of course do not solve all problems, but they are an
advancement. (04)
-Avril (05)
Quoting "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: (06)
> John Sowa wrote:
>
> The fundamental principle is that there is a
> reason for every
>
> distinction. Those reasons are fundamental to
> ontology. Mereology
>
> is useful. But the hope that it might provide
> "objective" criteria
>
> for ontology is a fantasy -- an extremely
> *misleading* fantasy.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> Agreed; it is the observer who decides what
> distinctions to apply, and that makes the
> observer's subjective ontology the appropriate one
> to use, not some so-called "objective" ontology.
>
>
>
> Even worse, no two people use exactly the same
> ontology, which is one of those things that make
> interpersonal communications so very faulty.
>
>
>
> -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 John F Sowa
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 7:29 AM
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Universal Basic
> Semantic Structures
>
>
>
> On 9/26/2012 9:16 AM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
>
>> Then you agree with the author of the second
> paper?
>
>>
>
>> Robinson, Edward Heath. 2012. Reexamining fiat,
> bona fide
>
>> and force dynamic boundaries for geopolitical
> entities and
>
>> their placement in DOLCE. Applied Ontology 7
> (2012),
>
>> pp. 93-108, DOI 10.3233/AO-2012-0103, IOS Press.
>
>
>
> I haven't had a chance to read that paper. But I
> objected to the
>
> distinction of fiat vs. natural boundaries as soon
> as it was published.
>
>
>
> In physics, everything is continuous. Some
> gradients are sharper
>
> than others, but nothing in nature has a clearly
> defined or definable
>
> 0-thickness boundary.
>
>
>
> Just consider the human body. The boundary changes
> every time somebody
>
> gets a hair cut, clips fingernails, takes a bath,
> puts on make-up,
>
> removes contact lenses, or sheds a few skin cells.
> For legal purposes,
>
> even clothing is considered within the body's
> boundary.
>
>
>
> If you admit clothing, you have to ask about the
> difference between
>
> a wallet in somebody's pocket vs. a purse carried
> outside the boundary
>
> of the clothing. What about a necklace that might
> be partly under
>
> the clothing and partly outside? What about a
> backpack? If you admit
>
> a backpack, what about a suitcase that somebody is
> carrying. If you
>
> admit that, what about a cane? Crutches? A
> walker? A wheelchair?
>
> A seeing-eye dog?
>
>
>
> The fundamental principle is that there is a
> reason for every
>
> distinction. Those reasons are fundamental to
> ontology. Mereology
>
> is useful. But the hope that it might provide
> "objective" criteria
>
> for ontology is a fantasy -- an extremely
> *misleading* fantasy.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> _______________
>
> 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
>
>
>
> (07)
--
Avril Styrman
+358 40 7000 589 (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)
|