ontac-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ontac-forum] Theories, Models, Reasoning, Language, and Truth

To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: jamie.clark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Paul S Prueitt" <psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:56:59 -0700
Message-id: <CBEELNOPAHIKDGBGICBGCEAOHAAA.psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


of course, and I understand your saying that unlimited or infinite is the
same concept    (01)

but, also of course, if is not the same concept in mathematics.  This is a
very old distinction between actual and potential infinity.  Again, there
are practical implications to how one feels about this concept(s).    (02)

But here the point I am pressing, has to do with "when" the "number" or the
"model" is made available.    (03)

If the very large number, or the situational model for "this" event (ie an
event "now"), is produced in response to real time structure of those things
that are making up the event; we may have the creation of the very large
number or the situational model "now".    (04)

The core issue is not abduction, but induction; and by induction I mean also
the concept in biological morphology...  metabolic induction, selectionism,
etc.    (05)

As you know, an infinite set, say of integers, has as members all possible
positive integers (defined with Peano axioms to the the set of symbols
having a first element and having the property that any element in the set
has a secessor element.)    (06)

What I am having in mind is some set of basic ontological construction that
are in the spirit of SUMO (or in the spirit of the Foundational Model of
Anatomy as discussed at    (07)

http://sigpubs.biostr.washington.edu/archive/00000135/    (08)

so that ontologies developed according to the standard would be able to be
compliant without the imposition of specific machine inference mechanisms.
The standard would also be independant of the data encoding, and the formal
specification of knowledge representation (as in RDF).    (09)

The formal theory, however would be laid out in an understandable curriculum
that could be taught to non-computer scientists in universities.  Your
lattice of models must be part of that theory, but there are aspects of this
that we have not been able to talk about.    (010)

This "ontological resource" could be conceptual in nature and abstract, in
the sense of an abstract upper ontology, so that domain and utility ontology
might have the freedom to develop in a flexible fashion.    (011)

It would even be possible, using this resource, that a situational ontology
(and associated inference rules and deductive machinery) might come into
existence quickly to deal with some surprising situation.  This "emergant"
ontology would have the resources in the set of "common" concepts in the
central hub of a hub tyep ontology construction.    (012)

The term "controlled vocabulary" is often used.  Perhaps we should be
talking about a high level (abstract) "controlled conceptual specification"
having the abstract properties of SUMO, or the Part 1 of the ISO 15926
ontology.    (013)

There might be two or three developed so that individuals could select which
one they wanted to use, and some reconcilation of terminology differences
between controlled vocabulary technology (such as SchemaLogic's)
instanticated.  The various communities could then adaptively evolve their
specific domain and utility ontologies (with or without logics).    (014)


Comments?    (015)



-----Original Message-----
From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 8:50 AM
To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
Subject: Re: [ontac-forum] Theories, Models, Reasoning, Language, and
Truth    (016)


Paul,    (017)

The word "infinite" literally means without boundaries
-- i.e., unlimited.    (018)

 > Rather than "infinite number of models", if we were to
 > say "unlimited number of models" would this be in line
 > with what you want to say?    (019)

Use any word you please -- infinite, unlimited, open-ended.
They're synonyms.    (020)

John    (021)


_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG    (022)



_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: 
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG    (023)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>