|To:||doug@xxxxxxxxxx, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
|From:||William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Sat, 18 May 2013 18:30:53 -0400|
I was taught an effective theory of identity, with two cornerstones, and one that was quite widespread among logical theorists, good enough for practidcal work in science and ontology. It is a thread that runs through many philosophers and logicians, for millennia, to the present day, I thought, as follows:
x is the same as y
is not meaningful in itself, in that it lacks the context of a qualifier T, where T is a type of thing, so that the full _expression_ is
x is the same T as y.
And, for each type, there are *identity criteria*.
x is the same novel as y,
means that x and y are regarded as a single creative work by some set of authors, different from every other createive work, despite what differernces x and y might have in other regards (number of pages, etc.)
since orgin, intent, and very close similarity of narritive are the indentity criteria for 'novel'.
These being different from the identity for 'edition'
x is the same editioi of a novel as y
means not only that x and y are the same novel, but also that they have had the same editing, (spelling corrections, author's corrections, etc.) applied to them. (for example, it would be really funny if Melville said he was going to edit Moby Dick and sent in Billy Bud as the new edition).
This being different from 'same printing', and that in turn being different from 'same copy'.
While philosopers argue about everything, forever, and would nit pick at this too, I really thought that this was a cornerstone of understanding idenitity that clarifies many seeming conumdra.
The other correstone being the fact that identity is a judgement we make when encountering two sets of phenomina, at which point we must first classify the phenomina as a type, and then, under that type, determine if the two sets of phenomina meet the identity criteria for that type of thing. Clearly, two sets of phenomina are always two different phenomina setrs, two different experiences, but may be phenomina that manifest the same copy of the book, found first on the bookshelf, and later in a guest bedroom.
That is, this is not about particulars vs. universals, since two experiences are not even two experience of the same copy of a book unless you know what are the identity criteria for copy of a book.
The silly conumdra begin when one tries to substitute names of things for x and y. Jane is the same person as Sally. This takes ***alot*** of unpacking, if one bothers. And perhaps the most profound and difficult when the x and y are sub atomic particle phenomina. For those wary of abstractions and universals, one can build up the more abstract things as equivelences classes of the less abstract things, but again, this is a matter of predilection, subject to endless argument only if one is so inclinded.
But I always found that this unpacking could be done by those so inclinded, while the rest of us could use the concept of identity as long as we kept our context clear.
I think that I have introduce this notion to this forum before, with little effect, so I apologize if I am missing something that has happened since I learned these basics.
_________________________________________________________________ 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 (01)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?, John F Sowa|
|Next by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?, John F Sowa|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?, doug foxvog|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?, John F Sowa|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|