[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] axiom [motionmountain]

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 22:27:38 -0400
Message-id: <536D8E9A.9040801@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Leo,    (01)

Sorry about mixing your point and Pat's.  When I saw "PatH" at the
beginning of your note, I thought you were addressing Pat instead
of quoting him.    (02)

> I do think these things mean important things to applied ontology
> and ontological engineering, at least eventually,    (03)

I agree that physics (especially at the atomic level and at the level
of the entire cosmos) is essential for *philosophical* ontology --
i.e., a discussion and analysis of everything that exists.    (04)

> if any ontology engineer would like to trace back to the top
> what ontology really means.    (05)

But as Doug Lenat has said many times -- and I have cited many times
-- the top level is far less important than the mid levels and the
lower levels for any kind of application.    (06)

And even for an ontology about atomic physics or astronomy,
the issues about quantum mechanics and cosmology would be in
the microtheories.  Little, if any of that goes in the top.    (07)

John    (08)

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    (09)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>