jmcc,
(see below) (01)
On 4/12/2013 3:06 PM, jmcclure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> John Bottoms wrote: "Humans are resource-centric systems and as such
> we pay attention to potential opportunities. How do we represent that
> in KR?"
>
>
> John B identifies a truly intriguing question:
>
> If identifying "goals" of a system is as fundamental as identifying
> the users of a system, then the attainment of these goals is the
> proper "meta-goal" of every semantic system. Should not every semantic
> system identify the goals of the creators & users of the system, using
> this info to modify/refine its operation?
>
JB: I didn't say the goals should be the universals. Thanks again to
Lakoff for showing that the universals can be associated with resources
without explicitly identifying them as Maslow does, though Maslow is a
bit vague about them.
>
> or some such, but you get the idea (an if-then!)
>
> So my view of the world is that all concepts are adroitly classifiable
> into the 6W's (who, what, when, where, why, which) and the 2H's (how,
> how much). Each of these can be considered abbreviations for Who
> Information, What Information, etc. And each is characteristic of
> every "story" or "article" in a wiki, truly of every resource that can
> be identified within an RDF stream.
>
JB: The list can be part of Austin's "Speech Acts", the interrogatives.
The problem with Speech Acts is that Austin only considered sentences
that would physically change the world. And he only did it for a modulus
of 1 or near. His example is: "I hereby christen this ship "The Queen
Mary". The physical change in this example was the registry entry for
the name of the ship. (02)
He did not address changes of mental state that might result from
statements such as, "Your Mother Wears Combat Boots", the great slur of
my generation. Speech Acts are a good organizing structure, but needs to
be examined carefully, and not taken as gospel. (03)
And, my list differs a bit from yours; I include "could...have?" and
"would...have?" as interrogatives. (04)
-John Bottoms
>
> Meaning that a "goal" is easily seen to be a Why, answering the
> question "why" such & so action is will/is/was/would be performed. It
> is a Why attached to a person, organization that can be cited as
> explanatory for, and motivating towards, a particular action. The
> class "Goal" is essentially an instance of the Why metaclass.
>
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|