ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Universal Basic Semantic Structures

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:58:21 -0400
Message-id: <1c31bc453c4f2af471f6887d287afcb8.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, September 27, 2012 00:33, Pat Hayes wrote:
> On Sep 26, 2012, at 10:04 PM, William Frank wrote:
>> On 9/26/2012 5:45 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> > On Sep 26, 2012, at 1:10 PM, William Frank wrote:    (01)

>> >>   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.    (02)

>> > Consider a point in space, somewhere in the room you happen to be in.
>> Make it reasonably near several ordinary objects. The thing I describe
>> is the mereological sum of all, and only, the stuff inside a sphere
>> centered on that point, with a radius of 24 inches, at precisely 10:22
>> pm on the 27 September 2012, GMT.    (03)

>> Pat, my point is that when you describe something, you are ipso facto
>> classifying it. That is just what a description does. It specifies the
>> set of things that fit the description, even if that is a singleton.    (04)

> Well, OK, but then that reduces your claim to vacuity. That if description
> is classification, then to describe is to classify, is simply a tautology.
> Most people, I suspect, mean by "classify" something rather more than
> simply "refer to", so would understand your thesis as having some actual
> content. I understood it that way, but then I would claim that my example
> (which is taken from Cyc, by the way) is a counterexample to that less
> vacuous claim.    (05)

In Cyc, what you describe would be classified as both a #$PartiallyTangible
and a #$SphericalSolid  (which does not have to be solid!).  A broader
classification would be: #$ThreeDimensionalGeometricThing.    (06)

>> In particular, I think you HAVE classified the thing, as something
>> locallizable in space and sherical in shape, and occupying a particular
>> position at a particular time.   this distinquishes it from Pakistan,
>> topology, hurricane Dora, my brother, and many other things that do not
>> fit the classifier you created.    (07)

> It distinguishes it from those, but that hardly amounts to a
> classification in any sense I recognize. I have no idea what categories it
> would be said to belong to, for example.    (08)

The two categories -- something tangible and something with a contiguous
volume with a spherical shape -- are very general.  From your description,
i'm not sure that you could create a narrower classification.  You have
specified various properties of the thing: temporal, spatial location, and
radius.    (09)

> ...
>> So, this is a good rule for the completeness of an ontology, only it is
>> not a rule about the world, where everything DOES have a classifier.    (010)

Again, i object to the idea that things in the world have classifiers.  It
is sentient beings that generate the classifiers and attach them to things
whether they are in the world, or not.    (011)

> Well now, I think that is false, if I understand "classifier" in any
> reasonable sense. Under what heading (other than obviously artifactual
> ones such as "silly entities invented by Pat") could this instantaneous
> spherical piece of stuff be put? I cannot think of any.    (012)

Physical stuff (Cyc's #$PartiallyTangible) and spherical region (#$Cyc's
#$SphericalSolid.    (013)

-- doug    (014)

> Pat    (015)

>> It is a rule about how to build a human aritifact, a formal ontology.
>>
>> Wm
>>
>> >
>> > Pat Hayes
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> ------------------------------
>> > IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494
>> 3973
>> > 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
>> > Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
>> > FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
>> > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> William Frank
>>
>> 413/376-8167
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>    (016)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (017)

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