Re: [ontolog-forum] Computer science ontology vs. philosophical ontology

[Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>]

Amanda,

You are right.   The class was talking of St. Anselm Ontological Arguments.    I am not confused, however I was entertaining the idea about being confused.   Just to reevaluate my understanding of philosophical ontology.    Branching of philosophy, metaphysics, and ontology gets a little confusing with the semantics and usage with Biology and classification.  ( which I think is  the subset of the same)!

Here is the clearer experts of Ontology of Metaphysics,  Philosophy and  Ontology from wikipedia:

Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world that encompasses it,^[1] although the term is not easily defined.^[2] Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms:^[3]

1. What is ultimately there?
2. What is it like?

A person who studies metaphysics is called a metaphysicist ^[4] or a metaphysician.^[5] The metaphysician attempts to clarify the fundamental notions by which people understand the world, e.g., existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility. A central branch of metaphysics is ontology, the investigation into the basic categories of being and how they relate to each other. Another central branch of metaphysics is cosmology, the study of the origin (if it has had one), fundamental structure, nature, and dynamics of the universe.

Biological classification, or scientific classification in biology, is a method of scientific taxonomy used to group and categorize organisms into groups such as genus or species. These groups are known as taxa (singular: taxon).
Current systems of classifying forms of life descend from the thought presented by the Greek philosopher Aristotle, who published in his metaphysical works the first known classification of everything whatsoever, or "being". This is the scheme that gave such words as "'substance", "species", and "genus", and was retained in modified and less general form by Linnaeus.

Thanks,

Pavithra

On Sunday, November 3, 2013 12:56 PM, k Goodier <kgoodier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Well said, Amanda.

K

On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Amanda Vizedom <amanda.vizedom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Philosopher notoriously disagree about nearly everything, including the essence of their field and subfields. Nevertheless, no one even lightly familiar with philosophical ontology would say this. I must believe you have misread it. 

You may be confusing the broad field of philosophical ontology with a very specific family of arguments known as the "ontological argument" for the existence of god." and which are commonly dated to 11th century Europe. They are not generally considered within the field of philosophical ontology.  Moreover, although occassional new versions of this type of argument pop up, the general view is that the argument strategy is fundamedntally flawed. For a basic summary see http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/, but please do not be confused. This is no about the field of ontology, or arguments within that field, but only about a specific thread of philosophical-theological arguments that happen to have the word "ontological" in their common label.

Best,

Amanda

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

MIT Philosophy class says, Philosophical Ontology is about proving the existence of God..

On Saturday, November 2, 2013 9:37 PM, John McClure <jmcclure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Of course not and that is why the requirement that a property, by
itself, determines meaning, is ridiculous.

On 11/2/2013 2:55 PM, William Frank wrote:
> ... Is 'this sentence is in English' anything like 'the meeting is in
> the room'?

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)