ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] Distinction between ontology and semantics (Was: Re: Mor

To: [ontolog-forum] <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Phil Murray <pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:50:12 -0400
Message-id: <55AE4E14.2050901@xxxxxxxxx>
Dr. Obrst --

In this post, you warn against conflating ontology and semantics, but if you define an ontology as a "logical theory about some portion of the world" and semantics as "the relation between signifiers, like words, phrases, signs, and symbols, and what they stand for" (Wikipedia, "Semantics"), there certainly seems to be a lot of overlap.

Could you provide more a more precise statement of the important differences? Or is it simply a matter of ontology being a more formal approach with its own practices, technologies, and objectives?

Thanks,

     Phil Murray (not a KR professional)

Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
John,

Any human-specified "universal" (foundational) ontology has to follow reality (which exists independently of our ontological speculation, if you are a realist). This is why science and ontology are partners. Phlogiston theory flamed out as other science developed, but who knows: it may come back some day. Reality doesn't change; our descriptions/theories do. Theories are logical/mathematical descriptions of reality (though there may be other avenues at arriving at reality, if you tolerate religion and poetry, though these are probably less computable, at least currently), and as such, are or should be modifiable. One of our definitions of an ontology is that it is a logical theory about some portion of the world. 

Metaphysics, from which philosophical ontology springs, is useful as a body of discriminating thought/reasoning, that helps you filter nonsense, provides guidance as you look at the world and the possible/probable things in it. This is why metaphysics is necessary. It helps you cut the crap. It too constantly evolves. Because it is tethered even farther from direct reality than is ontology, sometimes it's considered useless -- an erroneous view, to me. For one example: think of how many folks conflate ontology with semantics.

Thanks,
Leo

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 2:36 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] More by and about Turing

On 7/17/2015 5:05 PM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
Glad to see Turing was a nascent poet.
Andrew Hodges, the author of that article about Turing, is
a mathematical physicist.  Among the issues he addresses are
Turing's comments about computability over the integers and
the real numbers.  Those questions are significant for any
computational ontology about space-time and the universe.

Hodges notes that Turing was (and still is) ahead of his time
in thinking about those problems.  That poem hints at them.

Hodges' also cites a web site about the *amplituhedron* :
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-
physics/


Implications for formal ontology:
Physicists have discovered a jewel-like geometric object that
dramatically simplifies calculations of particle interactions
and challenges the notion that space and time are fundamental
components of reality.

"This is completely new and very much simpler than anything
that has been done before," said Andrew Hodges, a mathematical
physicist at Oxford University who has been following the work.

"The degree of efficiency is mind-boggling," said Jacob Bourjaily,
a theoretical physicist at Harvard University. "You can easily do,
on paper, computations that were infeasible even with a computer."
This is just one of many, many reasons why I'm highly skeptical
about any proposals for a universal foundation ontology.  A new
discovery can pop up at any time that completely revolutionizes
and *obsoletes* any supposedly "ideal" foundation.

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

 
_________________________________________________________________
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)

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