] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
>Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?
>On 5/15/2013 10:14 AM, doug foxvog wrote:
>> FWIW, the workshop web page is
>That's a copy of the page I cited.
>In any case, I started to browse through the other publications
>on Ingvar Johansson's web site, and I recommend them as a useful
>resource for various issues that we have been discussing:
>I find his publications congenial. My main qualification is that some
>of them would benefit from Peircean semiotics. For example, I enjoyed
>his analysis of the intransitive part relations:
>> The Solution: Intransitive parthood predicates are not binary predicates
>> ... Instead [they are] either a relative product of two binary relations
>> ʽφʼ and ʽ<ʼ (so that it ought to be written ʽφ/< ʼ) or ... an implicitly
>> ternary relation (and so ought to be written ʽRxyzʼ). In both cases,
>> although in different ways, there are at least three relata involved;
>> not just two, as in the parthood relation of mereology.
>I realize that Peirce's terminology is definitely off-putting for many
>people. But it is refreshing to find philosophers who do not shy away
>from triadic relations when they are necessary.
>As another example, Johansson wrote a paper that begins "Can there be
>I'm glad that the answer is yes. For Peirce, however, the answer
>yes is fundamental to every aspect of his philosophy. Among those
>relational universals are the laws of nature. Every physical object
>is a manifestation of those laws, and any ontology that considers
>objects more fundamental than laws is fundamentally flawed.
>Another example is the short book "Is Ought?" about values:
> From the introduction:
>> Regrettably, there is no special word for the genus of which norms and
>> values, as well as virtues, are species...
>> To be very brief, the essence of my answers are that, yes, Oughts exist,
>> and that sometimes a change of Is rationally implies a change of Ought.
>Peirce would agree. For him, the genus that includes laws as well as
>norms, values, virtues, functions, and intentionality is Thirdness.
>Not coincidentally, all of them require triadic relations.
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>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/
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