To: | Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Giancarlo Guizzardi <gguizzardi@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Thu, 2 Feb 2012 14:28:57 -0300 |
Message-id: | <CAHdWRPis3jeN=qq4K4SzwfnH4WFgFcxsAF0mCqjh8bMp6yUfNQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Hi all, Unfortunately, I could not reply sooner to this and could not read all the messages that the discussion generated yet. So, I apologise if I missing something or repeating something here...
@Chris Partridge
I don´t get what you mean by stating that qua entities do not have identity. In the view of qua entities defended in the papers I mentioned earlier they do have a numerical identity separate from their bearers. They are existentially dependent and identificationally dependent as well but they do have a determinate separate identity.
@Anatoly:
>> But you should separate role of individual (role of Mr.Smith -- it can be whole >> temporal part of individual that perform activities that associated with that role) and >> functional component of organization that will be filled with this role of individual >> when Mr.Smith is actually in his role.
Yes. Let´s take the prime minister of Italy There is certainly the Role – Prime Minister of Italy characterized by a number of commitments and claims and defined in a certain normative description (the Italian Constitution). For me, this Role is a type (a universal if you like which is repeatable and which can be predicated into a number of individuals). Of course, this Role can itself change and have its own type-properties (second order properties). For instance, maximum number of years that one can instantiate (play) that role is a property of the type (not of the individuals instantiating that role) and which can change. These second order properties are of course not special of roles. Take for instance the maximal life span as a property of the Species Lion – again, a property of the type, not of individual lions…Of course, all this is not new…
Asides from the type, there is the person (in this case) instantiating that role, e.g., Berlusconi, which is an individual and, in my view, there is a complex of instantiated properties (tropes, moments, modes) which Berlusconi acquires by virtue of instantiating that role. The latter is what I call a qua entity (Berlusconi-qua-prime-minister-of-Italy). Alternatively, one can view Berlusconi-qua-prime-minister-of-Italy as an aspectual slice of Berlusconi. Of course now that (fortunately IMO) Berlusconi isn´t prime minister of Italy anymore, we have another individual instantiating that role (Mario Monti) and we can have another qua entity there as well.
Now, there seems to be yet another entity, the perspectile “Prime Minister of Italy” which is the concrete individual which is composed of all the qua entities of people which played that role. Perhaps the reason for doing that would be to avoid dealing with second order properties and still be able to attribute properties to the “Prime Minister of Italy”. I am not sure…(perhaps Nicola or Emmanuele can reply to this here).
Best, Giancarlo On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Chris Partridge <partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012 Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (01) |
Previous by Date: | [ontology-summit] Roles, Fillers, and Role relations, Patrick Cassidy |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontology-summit] System Components, Giancarlo Guizzardi |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontology-summit] System Components, Chris Partridge |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontology-summit] System Components, Giancarlo Guizzardi |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |