On Wed, October 3, 2012 16:54, David C. Hay wrote:
> Whoa! (01)
> You've touched on an area that really burns me up. For years now, my
> models have shown Party which is an abstract super-type that
> designates either a Person or an Organization. (02)
Let's call these dch:Party, dch:Person, and dch:Organization. (03)
> A Person is defined
> as an individual human being, and an Organization is defined as a
> group of human beings, brought together physically or virtually for
> some purpose. (04)
The definition of dch:Organization does not include organizations of
organizations (such as the United Nations). (05)
The definition of dch:Organization is far broader than definitions of
"organization" i find in dictionaries. Groups of people are physically
brought together for sporting events and co-riding of mass transit
all the time without falling under the normal definitions of "organization".
Data bases virtually bring groups of humans together for some purpose,
again without creating what most would consider an organization. (06)
As John says, what is most important is that the various concepts be
modeled. (07)
But careful naming of concepts is useful. (08)
For WORDS that have multiple meanings, arguing over which is THE
CORRECT meaning of the word, makes little sense. (09)
> In my world (the US Supreme Court notwithstanding) an Organization is
> not a Person! (010)
Since the Supremes did not mention dch:Organization or dch:Person,
i'm not sure why the question should even come up. (011)
> The Supreme Court decision (Citizens United vs. The
> Federal Election Commission, 2010) confusing these two very different
> concepts has had profound political impact in the United States, and
> may prove to be the end of the American democracy. (012)
The US has had "corporate personhood" to some extent since the 1870s
or 1880s. You might want to look at the current issue of <i>The Nation</i>
"The 1 Percent Court", with articles such as "Citizens United and the
Corporate Court", "One Nation by and for the Corporations", and "The
Roberts Court and Wall Street". (013)
> Yes, the distinction is important. (014)
> If you want to talk about something that could be either a Person or
> an Organization, the concept Party works just fine. (015)
The name "Party", makes me wonder "party to what". There are various
levels of things that can be intentional actors, which are useful to care-
fully distinguish. (016)
A little bit of the OpenCyc hierarchy in this area is:
[I include the #$comment form many of these below.] (017)
Agent-Generic
IntelligentAgent
SocialBeing
Person
HomoSapiens
LegalAgent
LegalCorporation
MultiIndividualAgent-Intelligent
Organization
LegalCorporation
OrganizationOfPeopleOnly
OrganizationOfOrganizations
IndividualAgent
Person
MultiIndividualAgent
MultiIndividualAgent-Intelligent (018)
Cyc has a context, AllPersonsAreHumanMt, in which the classes
Person and HomoSapiens are co-extensive, with non-human
subclasses of HomoSapiens empty. For most purposes, one
would choose to include this context. (019)
"the collection of all persons. Personhood is a vague, emotionally loaded
yet extremely salient concept with respect to common-sense reasoning.
Something is an instance of Person if it is an individual IntelligentAgent
with perceptual sensibility, capable of complex social relationships, and
possessing a certain moral sophistication and an intrinsic moral value, or
-- if it lacks certain of these characteristics -- is a member of a
distinct type of SocialBeing (usually a species) which generally possesses
such characteristics and is therefore acknowledged by other members of
that type as a person within their social systems. Most currently known
instances of Person are instances of HomoSapiens but there is no reason
why all need be (consider Hobbits in the fictional world of
LordOfTheRings-Trilogy). They need not even be instances of
BiologicalLivingObject (consider the possibility of a person-like AI).
Also note that Person excludes non-human 'legal persons', who are,
however, included in the collection LegalAgent." (020)
"HomoSapiens is the species to which modern humans belong, though strictly
speaking (and not entirely uncontroversially amongst paleontologists) they
comprise only a subset of it (namely "homo sapiens sapiens"). The species
also contains Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon sub-species (both now extinct).
Given the evidence of sophisticated tool-use, burial practices etc. even
amongst the latter two sub-species, this collection is a specialization of
Person. See also HumanBody." (021)
" Each instance of Agent-Generic is a being that has desires or
intentions, and the ability to act on those desires or intentions.
Instances of Agent-Generic may be individuals (see the specialization
IndividualAgent) or they may consist of several Agent-Generics operating
together (see the specialization MultiIndividualAgent). Notable
specializations of Agent-Generic include Agent-PartiallyTangible and
Artifact-Agentive." (022)
" An agent is an IntelligentAgent if and only if it is capable of knowing
and acting, and capable of employing its knowledge in its actions. An
intelligent agent typically knowsAbout certain things, and its beliefs
concerning those things influences its actions. As with agents generally,
an intelligent agent might either be a single individual, such as a
person, or a group consisting of two or more individual agents, such as a
business or government organization. Specializations of IntelligentAgent
include SocialBeing and MultiIndividualAgent-Intelligent." (023)
"Each instance of IndividualAgent is an instance of Agent-Generic that is
not itself a group composed of other instances of Agent-Generic. Notable
specializations of IndividualAgent include Person and Animal. Note that
Organization is not a specialization of IndividualAgent, since instances
of Organization are groups composed of other instances of Agent-Generic." (024)
" Each instance of SocialBeing is an intelligent agent whose status as an
agent is acknowledged within some social system, and who is capable of
playing certain social roles within that system. Note that in many (but
not all) cases, a SocialBeing will have certain rights and
responsibilities associated with his/her/its status within the relevant
social system. For agents who are granted rights and responsibilities
under some legal system, see the specialization LegalAgent. Other notable
specializations of SocialBeing are Person and Organization." (025)
"Each instance of LegalAgent is an agent who has some status in a
particular legal system. At the very least, such an agent is recognized by
some legal authority as having some kinds of rights and/or
responsibilities as an agent (e.g., citizens of Germany), or as being
subject to certain restrictions and penalties. Thus, instances of
LegalAgent include agents that may have property rights, may be taxed, may
have a government identification number, may be sued, may have an address,
or may buy or sell. Note that membership in this collection is very much
dependent upon context. In some societies, only adult males and various
kinds of state-run organizations would be included in LegalAgent." (026)
"Each instance of Organization is a group whose group-members are
instances of IntelligentAgent. In each instance of Organization, certain
relationships and obligations exist between the members of the
organization, or between the organization and its members. Instances of
Organization include both informal and legally constituted organizations.
Each instance of Organization can undertake projects, enter into
agreements, own property, and do other tasks characteristic of agents.
Notable specializations of Organization include
LegalGovernmentOrganization, CommercialOrganization, and
GeopoliticalEntity." (027)
"Each instance of OrganizationOfPeopleOnly is an organization each of
whose members (see the predicate hasMembers) is an instance of Person.
Examples of OrganizationOfPeopleOnly include a human nuclear family, a
carpool, or a sports team. Negative examples include
UnitedNationsOrganization or OrganizationOfAmericanStates." (028)
> Dave Hay
>
>
> At 02:21 PM 10/3/2012, you wrote:
>>On 10/3/2012 8:06 AM, Andries van Renssen wrote:
>> > for me 'person' is not a role. But customer, student, patient,
>> performer,
>> > enabler, etc. are roles, because they are extrinsic aspects which
>> > existence depend on a relation with some other role player.
>>
>>The word 'person' is derived from the Roman 'persona', which was applied
>>to the masks worn by actors in Greco-Roman tragedies and comedies.
>>
>>The etymology shows its origin: 'persona' comes from 'per sonare'
>>(to sound through) -- the lips were usually exaggerated in a kind
>>of megaphone that helped the actors project their voices in the
>>outdoor amphitheaters.
>>
>>The two-word phrase 'human being' is the most neutral English term
>>for an individual of the species Homo sapiens. Other English words,
>>'man', 'woman', 'boy', 'girl', 'child', and 'adult' designate
>>a human being of a particular sex and/or age.
>>
>>Since the US legal system has adopted the word 'person' for a role
>>that can be played by an organization, the role aspect has been
>>emphasized, rather than diminished by time.
>>
>>To be absolutely neutral, an ontology could use the term HumanBeing
>>for an instance of Homo sap. Then the category Person could be
>>used for individuals or organizations that have a certain legal
>>status in society.
>>
>>The distinction is important. The character string used in the KRep
>>is less significant. One solution is to use the URI or IRI as the
>>official designator, and to have a list of possible realizations
>>in different languages in the document that describes the term.
>>
>>John Sowa
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>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
> (029)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (030)
|