I can do that, John.
I meant what I said before.
The level of detail does not matter -- you can still use mKR.
Dick McCullough
Context Knowledge Systems
mKE and the mKR language
mKR/mKE tutorial> Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 00:48:48 -0400
> From: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] FW: mKR2IKL
>
> Bruce and Dick,
>
> Bruce
> > I'd say she [Ayn Rand] figured this stuff out before the days of
> > of computer science, when the subject [abstraction] was still
> > pretty blurry.
>
> No. The foundations of computer science (logic, set theory,
> automata theory, recursive functions, lambda abstractions,
> decidability, computability, production rules, etc.) were
> developed in depth in the late 19th and early 20th century.
> By 1940 -- several years before the first electronic computers
> -- those details were thoroughly analyzed and published.
>
> In fact, C. S. Peirce published a paper on "Logical Machines" in
> 1887 in the _American Journal of Psychology_. He discussed the
> mechanical machines by Babbage and the mechanical machines for
> doing Boolean reasoning. Around the same time, he wrote to one
> of the designers of those machines and recommended electrical
> circuits instead of mechanical linkages, and he included circuit
> designs for AND and OR. See
>
> http://history-computer.com/Library/Peirce.pdf
>
> In the conclusion, Peirce compared the logical machines to the
> Jacquard looms. That was significant because the punched cards
> used to control the Jacquard loom also inspired Hollerith to
> design punched card machines to tabulate the 1890 census.
>
> Dick
> > I have explained the meaning of "::" several times previously.
> >
> > proposition name :: proposition
>
> If you want to give a name to a proposition, then give it
> a name like p or q. The following names just create confusion:
>
> > Consciousness :: I am conscious.
> > Existence :: Existence exists.
> > Existence :: entity, characteristic, proposition isa existent;
> > Identity :: existent has characteristic;
>
> In each case, the name on the left is an English word whose meaning
> is related to the proposition on the right in a different way.
> That is definitely not helpful.
>
> > I summarize the many pages where she talks about...
>
> Don't summarize "many pages". Just take *one page* and translate
> every English sentence as precisely as possible to your notation.
>
> When you are forced to take every feature of every sentence into
> account, you must really be precise. After you do that, ask
> somebody else who had not read the original to translate your
> notation back to English. Then ask a third party to compare
> the two. That would be significant.
>
> All that summarizing is far less valuable than being able
> to represent one page precisely -- in a way that another
> person could reconstruct the original meaning.
>
> John
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>