On Wed, April 10, 2013 14:50, Pat Hayes wrote: (01)
> ...
> If you wish to claim that some words are not things, then you are obliged
> to say what it is you think they are. The grammatical distinction can
> hardly work, as (in English at least) the same word may often be used both
> as a noun and as a verb, eg "stitch". If nouns but not verbs are things,
> is "stitch" a thing?
> ...
> Many, probably most, ontology
> formalisms allow words to exist as things, eg "stitch"@en^^rdf:langString
> in RDF 1.1. Character strings are one of the basic XML Schema datatypes. (02)
I suggest that a character string (or even a langString) is not a 'word'
in the common sense of the term. Words have various properties
(conjugations, declensions, combining rules, homonyms, possibly multiple
spellings, histories of usage, etc.) that character strings do not have. (03)
How would you state various properties of words if you modeled them as
character strings? (04)
>... BTW, support for xsd:string is mandatory in OWL. (05)
But that does not bring us close to the concept, "word". (06)
-- doug foxvog (07)
> ...
>
> Pat
>
>
>> ). I will read or re-read the books that you suggested.
>>
>> Pavithra
>>
>>
>> From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
>> To: Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: [ontolog-forum] <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:35 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Dennett on the Darwinism of Memes
>>
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Pavithra wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > John Bottoms:
>> > From a modeling perspective:
>> >
>> > · Languages are first level abstraction of real world
>> > · Languages are expression of the world, allows us to express
>> and communicate past, present, future, real and imaginary, proven and
>> unproven aspects of the world.
>>
>> But they are also in the actual world, and can be studied empirically
>> like any other phenomenon.
>>
>> > · Words are parts of a language.
>> > · Nouns are used to express “things” in English language.
>> Things - as in entities. ( Not all words are things. For example,
>> verbs are words, but not things)
>>
>> All words are things. Not all words *describe* things, maybe.
>>
>> > · Nouns are a subset of words.
>> > · Memes are ideas / concepts, real or imaginary, proven or
>> unproven.
>> >
>> > Question is : do we need to model meme??
>>
>> Who is "we" and what is being "modeled"?
>>
>> > My opinion : Concepts can be named with a name and modeled. At
>> present we do not use the verbiage –“ meme” for it. Probably we can
>> use the name “meme” in the future.
>>
>> My advice would be to only use the term if you have a pretty exact idea
>> of what it is you are talking about, and document that understanding as
>> carefully as you possibly can.
>>
>> >
>> > About Darwinism, Americans use the word Darwinism from a scientific
>> evolution point of view vs theological, god made us, changed us (
>> mutation) etc.
>>
>> American scientists use the term the same way other scientists do.
>>
>> >
>> > Maxwell, & Dr. Steven.
>> > Thanks for summarizing my gibberish writing. ( It was not scientific
>> feed back, it was more of a general discussion)
>> > There is natural evolution due to mutation and then there is human
>> intervention for change.
>>
>> Until recently, the only intervention available was artificial
>> *selection*, which follows the natural process but amplifies the
>> effects.
>>
>> > Grafting & genetic engineering are human intervention. My point was
>> Darwinism did not include human intervention, or cross breeding among
>> subspecies.
>>
>> Darwin certainly considered cross-breeding and also human intervention
>> in breeding (eg of dogs and farm animals, which he studied at great
>> length: I recommend reading his "Origin of Species", it is a very
>> readable work.) He did not, of course, consider genetic engineering, as
>> genetics had not even been formulated when he was writing. I suspect he
>> would have been delighted and fascinated to have known about genetics
>> and DNA, but he did not have this pleasure.
>>
>> > You mentioned that his theory includes cross breeding among
>> subspecies??
>>
>> If animals can breed and produce fertile offspring, they are (by
>> definition) the same species.
>>
>> >
>> > However the following is not totally proven in all cases and is open
>> for speculation and there are ethical issues about genetic
>> engineering. ( I don;t want to go there)
>> > • crossing between different species is genetically fatal ..
>> > Thanks,
>> > Pavithra
>> >
>> >
>> > From: John Bottoms <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:20 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Dennett on the Darwinism of Memes
>> >
>> > Pavithra,
>> >
>> > I may not have remembered his wording correctly in the use of "word".
>> Also, it is a difficulty of linguistics that "thing" often gets used
>> when a better selection would be "entity". However, the audience
>> understood the intent of the question. Words come and go and likewise
>> memes come and go. They share some characteristics and there is a
>> shoot-from-the-hip impulse to put them in a lexicon or dictionary.
>> >
>> > Another view might be that memes are types of propositions that need
>> to be evaluated. They could be classified into "indeterminate" until
>> they are evaluated. Dennett does recognize that memes are "good" or
>> "bad", and I suppose we should accept that they can be resurrected.
>> One theory I have is that the term "meme" applies to atomic entities
>> that have particular attributes or properties that can be generalized
>> or rationalized. If that is true then we should be able to build
>> classifiers for memes. A question for exploration is whether that
>> property can be understood in a way that makes sense or is useful.
>> >
>> > Your view of giraffe evolution is referred to as Lamarckian
>> inheritance and it survives today only as a weakened theory.
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism)
>> >
>> > -John Bottoms
>> > Concord, MA USA
>> > On 4/9/2013 8:39 PM, Pavithra wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> Words are not things. "Words" representation things if they are
>> nouns. memes are ideas that spreads from person to person??
>> >>
>> >> Darwinism and theory of evolution explains how living organisms
>> evolve over few generations according to the needs/usage etc.
>> According to him Giraffe has long neck, because they keep stretching
>> their neck to eat branches and eventually it caused a genetic
>> mutation to aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection."
>> These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation.
>> >>
>> >> Darwin does not take cross pollination ( for lack of better word)
>> of plants and animals and between different species that happens in
>> one generation and produce offspring of blended types into
>> consideration. A Lion and Tiger may have a Liger for a child. You
>> can actually cut a branch of one fruit tree and put it another
>> fruit tree branch stub and tie it up and it may bear the fruit of
>> the first tree kind.. There is all sorts of intervention that
>> happens to change the way species of plants and animal world to
>> evolve into something new and different not only by genetic
>> mutation due to thousands of years of usage or need for survival
>> but due to cross pollination. I know this is a thesis for genetic
>> decoding not fiction.
>> >>
>> >> I still have to read the book listed below..
>> >>
>> >> Pavithra
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: John Bottoms <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> To: [ontolog-forum] <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 5:28 PM
>> >> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Dennett on the Darwinism of Memes
>> >>
>> >> Daniel Dennett's next book will be out in a few weeks and I had the
>> >> opportunity to hear him talk about how memes obey the tenets of
>> Darwinism.
>> >>
>> >> The title of his book is, "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for
>> Thinking".
>> >> (not available yet,
>> >> http://www.amazon.com/Intuition-Pumps-Other-Tools-Thinking/dp/0393082067)
>> >>
>> >> His argument starts by asking if words are things. Then he argues
>> that
>> >> if words are things then we should consider memes as things also. He
>> >> goes on to illustrate that memes follow the basic three principles of
>> >> Darwinism.
>> >>
>> >> His arguments are compelling and I wonder where they belong in the
>> grand
>> >> ontologies of entities. Are memes a new construct, or do memes simply
>> >> replicate a known construct?
>> >>
>> >> -John Bottoms
>> >> FirstStar Systems
>> >> Concord, MA USA
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _________________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (08)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (09)
|