On Fri, May 24, 2013 15:44, Hans Polzer wrote:
> ...
> Let's take the another simple example of social reality...
> the Prime Meridian. In my view of the world, it has no
> physical reality, no spatial extent. (01)
I'm confused as to what you mean by spatial extent here. The Prime
Meridian has a spatial location as a 2D surface cutting through the
surface of the Earth (although one can differ on the spatial extent
above and below the surface). It has no thickness and no mass.
But having spatial location greater than a single point falls within
my definition of spatial extent. (02)
> It is purely a conceptual/social construct
> (the long ago social part being the part that led to it going
> through Greenwich, England, as opposed to other possible and equally
> arbitrary points on the surface of the earth). (03)
I agree that it is a conceptual/social construct, but one that has
spatial extent in two dimensions. (04)
> It cannot be detect by some
> alien in a spaceship approaching the earth with any sensors that might be
> onboard. (05)
This means that it has no physical presence -- no mass, no energy.
It does not mean that it has no spatial location or extent. (06)
> Human institutions have created physical surrogates that make it
> possible to "sense" the Prime Meridian using GPS satellites or earlier
> radio-based navigational aids, once you obtain information about how to
> use these timing signals to determine
> where you are with respect to the Prime Meridian. But that
> doesn't make the Prime Meridian a real thing in physical reality
> with detectable spatial extent. (07)
Not a physically detectable spatial extent, no. (08)
> And, by the way, what would that spatial extent be if it were?? (09)
A flat 2D surface cutting through the surface of the Earth with
indeterminate spatial extent above and below the surface. (010)
Regards,
doug foxvog (011)
> Hans
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew West
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 4:48 AM
> To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Spatial Extent of Abstract Entities?
>
> Dear Hans,
>
>> Matthew,
>>
>> So how does one detect/ascertain the spatial extent of an organization
> using
>> physical phenomenology?
>
>> How can one detect whether a person or an asset is a member of or
>> owned by an organization using physical phenomenology?
>
> MW: I do not accept that physical phenomenology is the only way that the
> existence of individuals can be determined.
>
> MW: The way you detect the existence of an organization is by looking
> through the paperwork. Organizations are socially constructed. They exist
> because we say so. So you have to look for where we said so. Things like
> employment contracts, purchases, sales, etc. That they are socially
> constructed does not mean that what is socially constructed is not
> physical.
>
>> Why do we
>> need bar codes and RF ID tags and ID cards, etc., etc.
>> to determine which
>> organization some thing or body belongs to?
>
> MW: I can remember a time when you did not need such things. Sigh.
>
>> Because this information is not
>> detectable in physical space otherwise! In other words, the
>> organization
> is
>> invisible in physical reality.
>
> MW: It seems to me that you have a view of the world that puts severe
> constraints on what can possibly exist. I can only say that I do not share
> it.
>
>> It exists only in various collective
>> mental/social realities in various ways.
>
> MW: No. It is created by social agreements, but it exists as a physical
> reality.
>
>> Maybe if we develop mind readers
>> we'll be able to "sense" organizations, at least for their people
> component,
>> but I don't see that happening soon.
>
> MW: You sense organisations by looking at the paperwork.
>>
>> And as to money, sure there are physical phenomena somewhere in the
> physical
>> manifestation of cyberspace that represent your money from one moment
>> to
> the
>> next (usually in multiple locations). But try to find it with any
>> physical sensors you care to employ. None of us would recognize the
>> physical manifestation as money, much less ours. Much easier to
>> connect to cyber representations of it via institutionally provided
> network services.
>
> MW: The cyber representation ARE the money. If you cannot detect it, it
> does
> not exist. It is detected by computer programs that tell you what the
> balance in your account is.
>
>> So what
>> use to us is information about such money's spatial extent, as
>> extremely
> small
>> as it is?
>
> MW: We don't need to know what it is if we don't care. The point is that
> it
> has one somewhere.
>
>>
>> I'm intrigued by your distinction between establishment of the
> organization
>> and its existence/evolution in 4D. People agreeing is certainly an
> activity
>> detectable and representable in 4D, but if you weren't around at the
>> time
> this
>> activity took place, you would not know that an organization was formed.
> And
>> yes, people conducting activities in response to such an agreement is
>> certainly detectable, but you would not have any way of
>> knowing/detecting that they were conducting those activities in
>> fulfillment of said
> agreement
>> through physical inspection without doing a lot of inferencing.
>
> MW: This is why people write these things down, so there is evidence you
> can
> refer to.
>>
>> By the way, my whole motivation for this discussion are people who try
>> to develop systems which attempt to create a representation of reality
>> from physical sensors (radars, audio, infrared, chemical, etc. etc.)
>> that
> includes
>> organizational affiliation. I have never seen this work reliably,
>> despite
> all
>> kinds of probabilistic inferencing in tightly constrained operational
>> contexts. One must find sources of organizational affiliation mapped
>> to detectable physical attributes somewhere in cyberspace, such as
>> biometric
> data
>> or surrogates such as ID cards, IFF and the like. Of course, the
>> latter
> aren't
>> error-free either, but a lot better than relying on physical
>> phenomenology sensors to determine organizational affiliations
>
> MW: Well, part of the physical reality you need, is the paperwork/records
> about what has been agreed. This then enables you to interpret what else
> is
> going on.
>>
>> So I usually ask people I meet on travel or at conferences who they
>> work
> for.
>> Sometimes they wear company logo clothing, but that's not 100% reliable.
> And
>> some people work for/represent multiple organizations. And we all work
>> for ourselves, at least part of the time.
>
> MW: Yes, asking people who they work for is a good strategy. I might even
> ask for a business card.
>
> MW: Quite a lot of your questions have been suggesting that if I can't
> detect what something consists of, then that thing must somehow be
> abstract
> and not physical. So how about a beach? A beach is constituted from grains
> of sand. It is practically impossible to know about every grain of sand,
> its
> location, and mass. Does that make a beach abstract in your eyes?
>
> 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/
> https://sites.google.com/site/drmatthewwest/
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire,
> SG6 2SU.
>
>
>
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew
>> West
>> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:34 AM
>> To: '[ontolog-forum] '
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level
>> ontology?
>>
>> Dear Hans,
>>
>> > I think we've had this discussion before regarding what I called
>> "conceptual
>> > reality". I understand you have difficulty envisioning an
>> > organization as
>> not
>> > having any spatial extent, possibly because there is almost always
>> > some physical manifestation of the organization, such as assets and
>> members.
>>
>> MW: It would be more accurate to say that I reject conceptual
>> individuals, such as you claim organizations to be.
>>
>> > But
>> > members exist physically independent of the organization, and
>> > members come
>> and
>> > go while the organization continues (temporal extent independent of
>> > any specific members).
>> > And physical assets also have existence independent of the
>> > organization - they continue to exist if the organization disappears
>> > (due
>> to
>> > bankruptcy, for example).
>>
>> MW: That does not prevent organizations being constituted from
>> temporal
> parts
>> of those things.
>>
>> > Such assets may be "owned" by the organization, but they don't
>> > define the organization or its existence.
>>
>> MW: They are not what brings it into being, but what brings something
>> into being is not usually the same as what constitutes something.
>>
>> > In most cases, formal
>> > organizations are defined by a piece of paper filed with some
>> > governing
>> body.
>>
>> MW: Indeed. The agreement that the piece of paper represents is what
> brings
>> the organization into existence. But as I pointed out above, that is
>> not
> what
>> constitutes the organization.
>>
>> > But even that piece of paper is not the physical manifestation of
>> > the organization - if it gets destroyed (fire, tornado, etc.), it
>> > will be
>> readily
>> > replaced.
>>
>> MW: Quite. See above.
>>
>> > Fundamentally an organization is an agreement among participants to
>> > associate with each other for some stated purpose/duration under
>> > some governing rules (bylaws, regulations, etc.).
>>
>> MW: Well to be picky, the agreement is what brings the organization
>> into existence, it is the fulfilment of the agreement that is the
>> organization itself.
>>
>> > But the physicality of the
>> > participants doesn't define the spatial extent of the organization
>> > except
>> in
>> > some fairly narrow contexts/perspectives.
>>
>> MW: The fulfilment of an agreement is an activity, and an activity (in
>> 4D
> at
>> least) consists of the temporal parts of the participants in that
> activity,
>> i.e. people in their organizational roles, and assets etc in theirs.
>>
>> > The agreement itself has no
>> > physicality or associated spatial extent aside from the piece of
>> > paper
>> that it
>> > might be written on.
>>
>> MW: Agreeing is also an activity, and so has spatio-temporal extent.
>> The
> piece
>> of paper is obviously a spatio-temporal extent, but at least we agree
>> that this is not the organization.
>>
>> > And some organizations exist in virtual realities such as "Second
>> > Life" with no real world spatial dimensions at all - unless you
>> want
>> > to argue that they exist in physical reality as bits encoded in some
>> servers
>> > (and backup servers) somewhere on the net.
>>
>> MW: Yes I do of course. That is the spatio-temporal reality in this
>> world
> -
>> without it there is on second life, the question is then what does it
>> represent. The answer is a possible world that happens in the cyber
>> space created. These are also spatio-temporal extents, just not ones
>> in this
> world,
>> and not always with the same rules.
>>
>> > I guess I don't see how it is
>> > useful to know the spatial extent of those bits in order to consider
>> > an organization as an individual.
>> >
>> > Let's take another example - money. What are the spatial dimensions
>> > of
>> your
>> > financial assets, other than currency in your wallet and maybe a
>> > coin collection at home? For all practical purposes, I submit that
>> > most of our monetary assets have no discernible (or operative)
>> > spatial dimensions,
>> aside
>> > from being associated with digital bits somewhere in the environs of
>> > the planet Earth (and that may change before too long - when cloud
>> > computing becomes "nebula computing").
>>
>> MW: You have answered your own question. Try having money without some
>> physical reality. It is not possible.
>>
>> > Some global disaster might prove me wrong - and push for that
>> > nebular computing environment.
>>
>> MW: The server farm will be somewhere, even if you do not know or care
> where.
>>
>> 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/
>> https://sites.google.com/site/drmatthewwest/
>> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> England
> and
>> Wales No. 6632177.
>> Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire,
>> SG6 2SU.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Hans
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew
>> > West
>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:18 AM
>> > To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; '[ontolog-forum] '
>> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level
> ontology?
>> >
>> > Dear Doug,
>> >
>> > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 12:39, Matthew West wrote:
>> > > > Dear Doug,
>> > > > I would say that differently:
>> > >
>> > > In 4D, i would too. But i would consider the organization an
>> > > object with
>> > a
>> > > temporal, but not a spatial dimension.
>> >
>> > MW: That is a rather half hearted 4 dimensionalism. I go for strong
>> > 4D
>> which
>> > has the 4D extent as the identity of any individual (not a set or
>> > relationship). So I do not even know what it means to exist if you
>> > have a temporal but not a spatial extent.
>> > In the strong 4D that I use, an organization consists of the
>> > temporal
>> parts of
>> > the people involved in it, whilst they are in an organizational role.
>> > Note that I have no problem constructing one kind of object out of
>> > the temporal parts of another kind (or kinds) of object.
>> > In any case, given the nature of space-time, I don't know what it
>> > means
>> to
>> > exist with a temporal extent, but no spatial extent.
>> > I therefore reject abstract individuals as an unnecessary commitment.
>> > >
>> > > >> I consider the team to be an organization. People become for a
>> > > >> time organizational members. That is a relationship between
>> > > >> them and the intangible organization.
>> > >
>> > > > MW: I would say that there is temporal part of the person that
>> > > > is a spatio-temporal part of the organization. There is also the
>> > > > matter of the role they play, but that is another matter.
>> > >
>> > > I would say that there is a temporal part of a person that plays
>> > > the role
>> > of
>> > > member in the organization. I would not consider that temporal
>> > > part of
>> > the
>> > > person to be a spatial part of a non-spatial organization.
>> >
>> > MW: As I said above. Given the nature of space-time I don't know
>> > what it
>> is to
>> > exist with a temporal extent without also having a spatial extent.
>> > >
>> > > Would you say, "Part of the Red Sox has a daughter named Sue."?
>> >
>> > MW: That strikes me as rather unlikely, but not impossible. Let us
>> > look at
>> the
>> > case. Presumably you do not mean any part of the Red Sox (say all
>> > the pitchers, or the right arm of one of them) but a particular
>> > player. Of
>> course,
>> > a particular player is not the whole life of the person, but the
>> > temporal
>> part
>> > of the person whilst they are a player for the Red Sox. Now what has
>> > a daughter is a father (or mother - but I am going to presume that
>> > there are
>> no
>> > women players for the Red Sox). The father is the temporal part of
>> > the
>> person
>> > from when the daughter is born until they die (I presume that you
>> > remain a father until your death, even if your daughter dies before
>> > you
>> > - you could make other choices). Now it is true that a Red Sox
>> > player has
>> a
>> > daughter if the temporal part of the person is identical to (has the
>> > same spatio-temporal extent) as the father of the daughter. That is
>> > unlikely,
>> but
>> > if the person who had a temporal part that was a Red Sox Player, and
>> > had a temporal part that was a father and the daughter was born
>> > exactly when
>> they
>> > joined the Red Sox and they died whilst still a Red Sox player, then
>> indeed, a
>> > part of the Red Sox would have a daughter.
>> >
>> > 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/
>> > https://sites.google.com/site/drmatthewwest/
>> > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> > England
>> and
>> > Wales No. 6632177.
>> > Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth Garden City,
>> Hertfordshire,
>> > SG6 2SU.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > -- 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/
>> > > > https://sites.google.com/site/drmatthewwest/
>> > > > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered
>> > > > in England and Wales No. 6632177.
>> > > > Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth Garden City,
>> > > > Hertfordshire,
>> > > > SG6 2SU.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _________________________________________________________________
>> > > 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
>> >
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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)
|