I have explained the meaning of "::" several times previously.
proposition name :: proposition
That is my notation, not Rand's. I think she would have benefited
from using the notation. It is my conviction that she was often
using the name of a proposition, without explicitly realizing it.
Rand talked about the axiomatic concept Existence.
I claim it makes perfect sense as the name of 1 or more
propositions. The "view" in mKR is the name of a group
of propositions which make up a context.
Dick McCullough
Context Knowledge Systems
mKE and the mKR language
mKR/mKE tutorial> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:15:11 -0400
> From: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] FW: mKR2IKL
>
> Dick,
>
> In mathematics (and mathematical logic), symbols have exactly the
> same meaning at each occurrence, and there are systematic rules
> for relating the symbols to one another. The following examples
> show that the symbols have no fixed meaning, and there are no rules
> for doing anything whatsoever with them.
>
> > Rand:
> > Consciousness :: I am conscious.
> > and then she goes on for many pages explaining how
> > there is a subject and object of conscious awareness,
> > and how perceptions are automatic.
>
> For the first line, "consciousness" and "I am conscious"
> are two very different, but related expressions. What does
> the symbol '::' mean? How does it relate the two sides?
>
> > Rand:
> > Existence :: Existence exists.
> > Rand says this is the only way to describe this axiomatic concept
> > in a proposition. She spends many pages describing
> > various aspects of existents.
>
> The two sides of '::' in this example are related in a totally
> different way from the two sides above. Either Rand is being
> very sloppy with her notation, or you didn't quote her exactly.
>
> > mKR:
> > Existence :: entity, characteristic, proposition isa existent;
>
> This is yet a third way of using the symbol '::'. Either Rand
> is being sloppy, you are being sloppy, or neither of you has
> a clue about how to reason precisely.
>
> > I summarize the many pages where
> > she talks about the identities of entities (and existents) with
> > Identity :: existent has characteristic;
>
> This is a fourth way of using the symbol '::'.
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>