You can include items on a list. Any items you like. The
set-membership relation is like the relation between an item on a
list and the list. (01)
To stand in the instance relation to a type, in contrast, you need to
be of that type and that means that you have to be a certain way: you
have to have the right sort of DNA, or be created on the basis of the
right sort of plan using the right sort of machine, and so forth. (02)
BS (03)
At 04:33 AM 2/6/2006, you wrote:
>Dear Barry,
>
>This does not answer my question, which is not about the difference
>between a set and a type, but between the difference in nature of the
>membership/instance of relationship.
>
>So please what is different in the nature of these relationships (not
>thing things they bring things into relationship too)?
>
>
>Regards
>
>Matthew West
>Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
>Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
>Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>
>Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
>Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
>http://www.shell.com
>http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Smith, Barry
> > Sent: 04 February 2006 13:41
> > To: ONTAC Taxonomy-Ontology Development Discussion
> > Subject: RE: Categorization (was RE: [ontac-dev] Representation of
> > attributes)
> >
> >
> >
> > >MW: Noone has yet been able to explain the difference (or
> > even offer an
> > >explanation) though more than one has asserted a difference.
> > I am simply
> > >seeking enlightenment.
> >
> > Sets are mathematical objects; the set-membership relation is an
> > abstract relation, which obtains independently of time and change.
> > Sets can be defined arbitrarily, as in the {the moon, Matthew West,
> > redness, 27} case. Sets are subject to arbitrary iterations,
> > combinations and intersections, ad nauseam, as in the
> >
> > {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Matthew West}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
> >
> > case. Which sets exist is a matter of mathematics and of
> > arbitrary definition.
> >
> > Types are entities (something like invariant patterns, commonalities,
> > kinds) in reality. Which types exist changes from epoch to epoch
> > (Darwin tells us) and even from year to year (as new varities of
> > potato chip are invented). Which types exist is a matter of
> > observation and scientific exeriment. Types are not subject to
> > arbitrary iterations, combinations and intersections. There is no
> > type 'rabbit or steering wheel'.
> >
> > BS
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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 (04)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (05)
|