Dear Doug, (01)
> > 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.
>
> >> > 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.
>
> >>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.
>
> 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. (02)
MW: Not at all. Sherlock Holmes is a person in one or more possible worlds,
so I have no trouble modelling him. The problem I see is that you are trying
to conflate Sherlock Holmes with writings about him.
>
> >> >>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.
>
> >> > 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?
>
> >>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.
>
> > MW: I'm afraid that is too wishy-washy for me.
>
> 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 #$ConceptualWork and its
> thousands of specializations and associated predicates. (03)
MW: I'm not saying you can't do it, just making a personal value judgement.
>
> > For me there are only
> > representations and the things they represent, and sets of those things.
>
> The fictional character, Sherlock Holmes, (or any other conceptual work)
is a
> thing represented by various representations. I don't know what the
utility
> is of modeling the character as a set would be. (04)
MW: I would not model Sherlock Holmes as a set, but what is common to the
different copies of a book is not Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes is one of
the things they represent. (05)
> Would you consider it to have
> finite or infinite cardinality? If you modeled it as a set, you couldn't
use
> existing relations (such as "starting time", "creator", "starts after",
etc.)
> for it and would need to create new predicates to state much of what one
would
> want to state about such things.
>
> > A shared concept is not something you can create out of nothing it
> > starts in one place and spreads. So I still think that the set is the
> > best way to handle what you want.
> > It can contain what is common to the different representations, e.g.
> > each of these representations represents the same thing.
>
> It's that "same thing" that i'm ontologizing.
>
> >> A "shared mental concept" would have subtypes such as accounts,
> >> agreements, obligations, laws, and games (such as Chess). Each of
> >> these subtypes of "shared mental concept" would have a number of
> >> different relations which apply to them and rules for such relations.
>
> > MW: Gee. I'm afraid I follow Searle for socially constructed objects.
> > I would not think of any of them as "shared mental concepts"
> > fundamentally, but of course they can all have representations in
peoples
> brains.
>
> I'm not sure who first used the term "shared mental concept". I prefer
the
> term "conceptual work", with a meaning that Cyc names
#$DevisedPracticeOrWork. (06)
MW: That would be the book content, not the character. The character is
represented by the conceptual work. (07)
Regards (08)
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/ (09)
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. (010)
> >> These various features (partial representation, incorrect
> >> representation,
> >> ...) do not seem to me to be possible features of sets.
>
> > MW: A set can have whatever members you want (as long as you can
> > identify them) and they can have subsets with qualifications.
>
> 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. (011)
>
> -- 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.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -- 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
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (013)
|