Re: [ontolog-forum] Person, Organization, and Citizens United vs. The Fe

[William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Gian Piero Zarri <zarri@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Matthew,

On 05/10/2012 23:35, Matthew West wrote:
> Dear Gian Piero,

 

"John"must be modelled a priori making use of a SPECIFIC AND UNIQUE instance of a concept like, e.g., "individual_person".

 

"Student" and "customer"
are generic properties, totally independent in principle from John and
from any other possible character. They must, of course, be ASSOCIATED
with John within a specific, transient spatio-temporal environment but,
being properties, cannot be INSTANTIATED

Does this mean that "John" CAN be instantiated?  I agree, but only by his mother and father and a little help from mother nature.    In my opinion, 'instantiation' is one of the three weird mental whirlpools that class-oriented programming has foisted on us.   Should we not be modelling the world, not how some software works?  Instatiation, in mathematical logic, means something else, and something good.
 

>
> MW: I disagree that there is a proliferation of records, for accidental
> properties you have to  have some record that represents the period of time
> the object has the accidental property. The rest is just about what you want
> to call it.

GPZ: I agree but, at least for clarity's sake, I prefer to keep the
"record" used to represent a transient property of John conceptually
distinct from the record used to represent the properties of John as a
standard individual.

I think it would be hard to find someone to disagree with that.    What I would choose to call this is, there is a relationship called marriage.  The marriage of john and cecialiia is and instance of that relationship. In that relationship, John plays the role of husband.  So, The role instance of husband in a marriage relationship is  linked to john.  It is the marriage  that has the dates, places of occurence, etc., as attributes. John as husband has a few too, but they are fully dependent on John as john and the marriage instance.  No marriage, no john as husband. No john, no john as husband.
 

 

Best regards,


G.P. Zarri




_________________________________________________________________
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

-- 
William Frank

413/376-8167


This email is confidential and proprietary, intended for its addressees only.
It may not be distributed to non-addressees, nor its contents divulged,
without the permission of the sender.
_________________________________________________________________
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)