Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:32:34 -0400
From: rrovetto@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Types of Formal (logical) Definitions in ontology
To clarify then, I did not mean artificial languages or "method[s] of reasoning humans invent". I did not mean artificial reasoning. I meant how the mind naturally reasons.
The psychology literature (psych of reasoning I think) and elsewhere if memory serves me, demonstrates (as does our familiarity with daily interactions and inner life) that human beings do not naturally reason according to deduction (or syllgostic logic). Deduction and syllogisms leave no room for creativity which is essential. A set of premises and what follows from that. Nothing outside the box. So my question was why then use it? Why not create an artificial language that more closely approaches the truth? Even if you don't agree that our minds don't naturally employ deduction, the question "What are non-fol/non-deduction/non-syllogistic logics for ontology?" is still valid
But if syllogistic is used for onto's "full stop" as you said, that's troubling because of the disparity and potential issues wrt ethics and psychology.
Besides wouldn't this mean that in order to get certain answers (that beyond what deduciton or syllogisms can yeild) work-arounds, additions or corrections are needed?
If "We create ontological models of some sets of concerns,
precisely because we have tools that implement syllogistic inference reliably" [bold added], then what about creating tools that implement a more realistic and expressive (closer to how our minds work) reasoning/logic?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 5:37 PM, John F Sowa
<sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ed,
I'm glad that we agree on something:
> I have a problem with: “syllogistic logic is not how the mind reasons”.
> It is rather only one of several reasoning mechanisms used by human
> minds. We also use induction, analogy, statistical reasoning, and a
> number of exotic mathematical methods.
Every method of reasoning that humans invented is supported by the
human mind. We don't know how to design a computer that can reason
by all the methods humans do. But any human who designs a digital
computer or a program that runs on it knows how to reason by the
same method as the computer.
> It takes many ingredients to make the soup of human consciousness;
> we are just growing the leeks.
I certainly agree with the first line. But I'm not sure about
the leeks.
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