On Mon, January 28, 2013 17:47, Matthew West wrote:
> doug foxvog wrote:
> <snip>
>> >>df: It seems to me that such a meaning for the "shared mental concept"
>> >> would have a lot of properties that i would not expect for the
>> >> character. (01)
>> > MW: Quite, so we are almost certainly interested in the set, which
>> > would have the properties common to each Sherlock Holmes, rather
>> > than the aggregate. (02)
>>df: However, sets are timeless, but the "shared mental concept" is not. It
>> started at a certain time. It has a creator, and other properties that
>> would not apply to a set.
>
> MW: Sets may be timeless, but all their members can be restricted in the
> time they are created. Take car models as an example. I don't agree that
> there is a creator of a shared concept. There are just the separate
> creation of concepts in different people's brains, caused perhaps by
> transmission of
> that concept. So I think the set of similar but separate concepts in
> different brains is the closest to reality you are going to get. (03)
You are saying that your method is unable to describe something like
the fictional character, Sherlock Holmes. For ontologists who find it
useful to model such things (let's call them "conceptual works"), another
method is needed. (04)
>> >>df: Such objects, whether artifacts, or representations in people's
>> >>brains certainly do exist. But i would distinguish the collection of
>> >>representations from the concept. (05)
>> > MW: In which case I have to ask what you think a concept is if it is
>> > something different from the set of all things that exemplify the
>> > concept? (06)
>>df: I would define a "shared mental concept" as a temporal massless
>> entity which can have an unlimited number of physical objects and
>> events representing it, such representations may be more or
>> less accurate and precise. Some representations may only
>> represent part of the concept; others may
>> incorrectly represent certain parts of the concept.
>> Representations may be of different forms: physical objects to be read;
>> physical objects to be projected by physical devices, events of people
>> acting out events which are part of the "shared mental concept",
>> events of people
>> reading text of the "shared mental concept", etc. (07)
> MW: I'm afraid that is too wishy-washy for me. (08)
This sort of thing has been ontologized in detail. I'm not writing a paper
to support each statement i make. Look into Cyc's #$ConceptualWork
and its thousands of specializations and associated predicates. (09)
> For me there are only
> representations and the things they represent, and sets of those things. (010)
The fictional character, Sherlock Holmes, (or any other conceptual work)
is a thing represented by various representations. I don't know what
the utility is of modeling the character as a set would be. Would you
consider it to have finite or infinite cardinality? If you modeled it as
a set, you couldn't use existing relations (such as "starting time",
"creator", "starts after", etc.) for it and would need to create new
predicates to state much of what one would want to state about such
things. (011)
> A shared concept is not something you can create out of nothing
> it starts in one place and spreads. So I still think that the set is
> the best way to handle what you want.
> It can contain what is common to the different representations,
> e.g. each of these representations represents the same thing. (012)
It's that "same thing" that i'm ontologizing. (013)
>> A "shared mental concept" would have subtypes
>> such as accounts, agreements,
>> obligations, laws, and games (such as Chess). Each of these subtypes of
>> "shared mental concept" would have a number of different relations which
>> apply to them and rules for such relations. (014)
> MW: Gee. I'm afraid I follow Searle for socially constructed objects. I
> would not think of any of them as "shared mental concepts" fundamentally,
> but of course they can all have representations in peoples brains. (015)
I'm not sure who first used the term "shared mental concept". I prefer the
term "conceptual work", with a meaning that Cyc names
#$DevisedPracticeOrWork. (016)
>> These various features (partial representation, incorrect
>> representation,
>> ...) do not seem to me to be possible features of sets. (017)
> MW: A set can have whatever members you want (as long as you can
> identify them) and they can have subsets with qualifications. (018)
Of course. I'm referring to the mass of relations that need to be
defined. I don't like calling temporal objects sets. Mathematical
sets are atemporal. (019)
-- doug foxvog (020)
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Information Junction
> Tel: +44 1489 880185
> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> Skype: dr.matthew.west
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>
>
>
>>
>> -- doug foxvog
>>
>> >>...
>>
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Matthew West
>> > Information Junction
>> > Tel: +44 1489 880185
>> > Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>> > Skype: dr.matthew.west
>> > matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>> > http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>> >
>> > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> > England and Wales No. 6632177.
>> > Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>> > Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> >> > (3) In our world, the fictional character of Holmes was
>> >> >> > partially inspired by the actual person Joseph Bell, who was a
> Doctor.
>> >>
>> >> >> inMt: PeopleDataMt.
>> >> >> (holdsSometimeDuring
>> >> >> (TimeIntervalBetweenFn (YearFn 1800) (YearFn 1886))
>> >> >> (and
>> >> >> (isa JosephBell HumanAdultMale)
>> >> >> (firstName JosephBell "Joseph")
>> >> >> (lastName JosephBell "Bell")
>> >> >> (occupation JosephBell Doctor)))
>> >> >> (<wasPartiallyInspiredByFor>
>> >>
>> >> > MW: Strings like this do not really mean anything at all.
>> >>
>> >> The angle brackets were to indicate that such a predicate does not
>> > currently
>> >> exist in OpenCyc. The predicate would have to be defined before it
>> >> had a meaning, if that's what you mean.
>> >>
>> >> I did not take the time to define the predicate for the purpose of
>> >> showing
>> > an
>> >> example of encoding the sentences. Most other examples of ontology
>> > snippets
>> >> i've seen in the Ontolog Forum do not restrict themselves to
>> >> previously defined terms.
>> >>
>> >> There were several other questions, which i failed to answer earlier,
>> >> of
>> > the
>> >> form:
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (1) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (4)?
>> >>
>> >> These are asking whether two things are "the same" in different
>> >> contexts.
>> >> Inter-contextual reasoning depends upon clearly stating what contexts
>> >> are being asked about, and from what context the answer is being
>> >> sought.
>> >>
>> >> The context of (1) is "In our world" and refers to the creation of a
>> > fictional
>> >> character. The fictional character has properties (of having a
>> >> creator,
>> > of
>> >> having a name, of having a creation date, and of being a character in
>> >> a specified fictional context.
>> >>
>> >> The context of (4) is also "In our world" and refers to additional
>> > fictional
>> >> contexts in which the fictional character is a character.
>> >> (1) specifies properties about the fictional character at time T1,
>> >> while
>> > (4)
>> >> specifies properties about the fictional character at time T2, both
>> > properties
>> >> "in our world".
>> >>
>> >> The question whether the two described fictional characters are "the
>> >> same"
>> >> seems to be similar to a question whether whether the baby Arthur
>> >> Conan
>> > Doyle
>> >> of 1860 was "the same" as the novelist who wrote <i>A Study in
>> >> Scarlet</i>
>> > in
>> >> 1886. I would accept one meaning of "the same" that would allow
>> >> these two things to be equal, and another meaning (represented by
>> >> another
>> >> predicate) which would allow these things to be different.
>> >>
>> >> I would say that the answer to the question to whether the two
>> >> Sherlock Holmeses are the same the same would be the same as the
>> >> answer to whether
>> > the
>> >> two Arthur Conan Doyles are the same.
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to use a predicate for "the same" that would allow the
>> >> answer to
>> > both
>> >> of these to be "yes".
>> >>
>> >> The question
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (5) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (6)?
>> >> relates (5)'s "fictional world ... which ... Conan Doyle conceived"
>> >> to a "possible real world" in which Conan Doyle "conceived of
>> >> [another]
>> > fictional
>> >> world".
>> >>
>> >> In the context of (5), there is no fictional character; Holmes is a
>> > detective.
>> >> In (6), there is a fictional character with different properties than
>> >> in
>> > (1),
>> >> and a fictional context (6') in which Holmes is a baker. The real
>> >> person, Sherlock Holmes, in (5) is different from the real person,
>> >> Sherlock Holmes
>> > in
>> >> (6'), and different from the fictional characters named Sherlock
>> >> Holmes in both (1) and (6). The fictional characters named Sherlock
>> >> Holmes in
>> >> (1) and (6) have different properties and so are different.
>> >>
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (1) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (7)?
>> >>
>> >> In the fictional context (7), the character Sherlock Holmes was
>> >> created by
>> > a
>> >> different person than in context (1), and thus is a different
>> >> fictional character. However, the Sherlock Holmes world created in
>> >> fictional
>> > context
>> >> (7) is the same as the Sherlock Holmes world created in context
>> >> (1) -- which we have previously identified as context (5). This
>> >> means
>> > that
>> >> the detective Sherlock Holmes in (5) is the same as the detective
>> >> Sherlock Holmes in (7') -- everything true about one is true about
>> >> the other.
>> >>
>> >> -- doug foxvog
>> >>
>> >> > Regards
>> >> >
>> >> > Matthew West
>> >> > Information Junction
>> >> > Tel: +44 1489 880185
>> >> > Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>> >> > Skype: dr.matthew.west
>> >> > matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>> >> > http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>> >> >
>> >> > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> >> > England and Wales No. 6632177.
>> >> > Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>> >> > Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>> >>
>> >> >> ArthurCannonDoyle JosephBell SherlockHolmes))
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > (4) In our world, the BBC commissioned a number of films
>> >> >> > featuring modern reinterpretations of the Conan Doyle stories,
>> >> >> > featuring a Holmes who in the worlds of those movies differed in
>> >> >> > some respects from the original source. [Written by Stephen
>> >> >> > Moffat, who isn't a Doctor, but writes one on TV]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: MassMediaDataMt.
>> >> >> (thereExists ?FILM
>> >> >> (and
>> >> >> (isa ?FILM Movie-CW)
>> >> >> (thereExists ?COMMISSIONING
>> >> >> (and
>> >> >> (isa ?COMMISSIONING CommissioningSomething)
>> >> >> (<objectCommissioned> ?COMMISSIONING ?FILM)
>> >> >> (ist (ContextOfPCWFn ?FILM)
>> >> >> (isa SherlockHolmes AdultMaleHuman))))))
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > (5) In the fictional world in which our Conan Doyle conceived,
>> >> >> > Holmes was a detective, who resided at 221B Baker St.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: SherlockHolmesWorld.
>> >> >> (isa SherlockHolmes AdultMaleHuman) (occupation SherlockHolmes
>> >> >> Detective)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (isa TwoTwoOneBBakerSt HumanResidence) (streetAddressText
>> >> >> TwoTwoOneBBakerSt "212B Baker St.") (<residesAt> SherlockHolmes
>> >> >> TwoTwoOneBBakerSt)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > (6) In a possible real world, that Conan Doyle may have
>> >> >> > conceived of a fictional world in which Holmes was a baker, who
>> >> >> > lived at 221B Detective St.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: UniversalVocabularyMt.
>> >> >> (ist PossibleRealWorld1324 DataMicrotheory) (genlMt
>> >> >> PossibleRealWorld1324
>> >> >> PeopleDataMt)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: CurrentWorldDataCollectorMt-NonDualist.
>> >> >> (ist PossibleRealWorld1324 FictionalContext)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: PossibleRealWorld1324.
>> >> >> (isa ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes CWCreation) (performedBy
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes ArthurConanDoyle) (dateOfEvent
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes (YearFn 1886)) (outputsCreated
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes SherlockHolmesWorld2) (holdsAfter
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes
>> >> >> (isa SherlockHolmesWorld2 FictionalContext)) (outputsCreated
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes SherlockHolmes) (holdsAfter
>> >> >> ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes
>> >> >> (isa SherlockHolmes FictionalCharacter))
>> >> >>
>> >> >> inMt: SherlockHolmesWorld2.
>> >> >> (isa SherlockHolmes AdultMaleHuman) (occupation SherlockHolmes
>> >> >> Baker)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (isa TwoTwoOneBBakerSt HumanResidence) (streetAddressText
>> >> >> TwoTwoOneBBakerSt "212B Detective St.") (<residesAt>
>> >> >> SherlockHolmes
>> >> >> TwoTwoOneBBakerSt)
>> >>
>> >> >> > (7) In yet another possible world, Bell may have been partially
>> >> >> > inspired by Conan Doyle to conceive of a Holmes and write
>> >> >> > fictional stories featuring that character word-for-word
>> >> >> > identical with the ones in our Conan Doyle wrote.
>> >>
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (1) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (4)?
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (5) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (6)?
>> >> >> > Is the fictional character in (1) the same fictional character
>> >> >> > as in (7)?
>> >>
>> >> >> > In our world could two people in the year 1700 discuss the
>> >> >> > character Sherlock Holmes?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm having problems with the tense, here.
>> >>
>> >> >> In our world, no one can do anything in the year 1700 -- what
>> >> >> happened, happened (Shroedinger's cat notwithstanding).
>> >>
>> >> >> Are you asking if it is possible that two people in the year 1700
>> >> >> could have discussed the character Sherlock Holmes -- even though
>> >> >> no one did?
>> >>
>> >> >> I figure that the possibility would have been greater than one in
>> >> >> a googleplex, (10^-(10^100) ) in that year. Two people could have
>> >> >> hypothesized an author who created a fictional detective with the
>> >> >> name "Sherlock Holmes".
>> >> >> The odds drop as things that they discuss about Holmes happen to
>> >> >> match up with features of the conceptual work.
>> >>
>> >> >> > In our world, could two people in 2013 discuss real properties
>> >> >> > of the character Sherlock Holmes (e.g. the street address where
>> >> >> > the character was conceived).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yes. One can ask:
>> >> >> inMt: CurrentWorldDataCollectorMt-NonDualist
>> >> >> (thereExists ?RESIDENCE
>> >> >> (and
>> >> >> (eventOccursAt ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes ?RESIDENCE)
>> >> >> (holdsIn ConceivingOfSherlockHolmes
>> >> >> (streetAddressText ?RESIDENCE ?ADDRESS)))
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -- doug f
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Simon
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _________________________________________________________________
>> >> 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
>>
>
> (021)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (022)
|