Dear Barry, (01)
See below. (02)
Regards (03)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (04)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> > >
> > > Leaving aside administrative domains (e.g. tax collection), types,
> > > like instances, are discovered. They are out there in
> reality. They
> > > form the subject-matter of scientific inquiry.
> >
> >MW: Well I would say that there is an abundance of sets out there and
> >some of them have greater significance than others.
>
> Interesting to find out why some have greater significance
> than others ... (05)
MW: Yes, but it is liberating not to have to do this within some
pre-conceived straight jacket.
>
>
> >BS> Quine used to talk about desert landscapes. You, it
> seems, are pining
> > > for desert landscapes from which all traces of the biological have
> > > been eliminated (even, I suppose, the oil and gas underneath).
> >
> >MW: Quite the reverse, I am saying there is every possible
> set you can
> >imagine (and probably more) and that you are just identifying some as
> >useful for some purpose.
>
> Analogously there is every possible combination of human bodily
> parts; there is Matthew's nose plus John's legs plus Patrick's feet
> (etc.); Patrick's nose plus Leo's legs plus Chris's feet (etc.);
> Matthew's nose plus Matthew's legs plus Matthew's feet (etc.). And
> all have equal civil rights, but you are just identifying some as
> useful for some purpose. (06)
MW: Quite. Again it is liberating not to have to work within a
preconceived straight jacket which can stop you discovering how things
really are.
>
> This is silly. (07)
MW: No it is straight jackets that are silly.
>
> > >
> > > >MW: My problem now is that I understand that you want types to be
> > > >restricted to things like rabbits, not "people with 376
> > > hairs on their
> > > >arms" or "4, the moon, and me". Now, whilst I am sympathetic
> > > >to the idea of natural kinds, it seems to me that these
> > > three examples
> > > >actually sit in a spectrum and there is no clear divide
> between them
> > > >(though these three being prototypical can be easily
> distinguished).
> > >
> > > There are many terms for which we have clear examples of entities
> > > which fall under them, clear examples of entities which
> do not fall
> > > under them, and then a penumbra of problematic cases in between.
> > > Responses to this problem for 'type' might be:
> > >
> > > 1. it is hard work to find out which types exist (this
> work is called
> > > 'science') (BS)
> > > 2. we should refrain from formulating axioms about what
> is a type (JS)
> > > 3. 'type' is redundant; we should talk of sets instead,
> keeping our
> > > heads under the desert sand to avoid all sight e.g. of
> > > anything biological (MW)
> >
> >MW: Well as usual you indulge in gross misrepresentation
> when all else
> >fails.
> >
> >MW: In a 4D world I am happy to concede that there will be a
> set of sets
> >that corresponds to what you would refer to as types. (With
> an abundance
> >of sets of course its there). In your 3D world you seem to need these
> >things to be able to have varying membership over time. That
> is simply
> >a problem I don't have.
>
> Indeed. I take it that you when were doing arithmetic tests in
> school, your answer would always have the form: "There is an
> abundance of numbers out there, one of which is the correction
> solution to this problem." (08)
MW: Not at all. I looked at the abundance of numbers and selected
the appropriate one, confident that noone could forbid me to use
it. (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-dev/
To Post: mailto:ontac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-dev/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (010)
|