Dear Barry, (01)
See below. (02)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Smith, Barry
> Sent: 12 January 2006 11:27
> To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
> Subject: RE: [ontac-forum] Re: The world may fundamentally be
> inexplicable
>
>
>
> > > >How do you express:
> > > > "Fido is a dog."
> > >
> > > Fido instance_of dog
> > >
> > > 'Fido' names an independent continuant (particular)
> > > 'dog' names a type (universal, kind ...)
> >
> >MW: Fido classified_as dog
> >
> >MW: Fido names a possible_individual (spatio-temporal extent) (we do
> >not know from the context whether or not it is an
> actual_individual, i.e.
> >part of our world, or hypothetical, i.e. part of some other
> possible_world).
>
> 'Dog' means dog; not possible dog, hypothetical dog, dog in Russian
> fiction, etc. (03)
MW: I didn't say otherwise. It is Fido that might or might not be
in our universe.
>
> There is a Californian sect called 'general semantics', run by a guru
> called Count Korzybski. One of Korzybski's principles is that all
> language is vague, and to make this clear he insists that all members
> of the sect conclude every sentence with the word 'etc.', etc.
>
> Matthew is making the same mistake. He thinks we should include with
> every noun the term 'actual'. (04)
MW: Not at all. It depends whether you care.
>
> >MW: Fido is both a physical_object and an activity (living process).
>
> Sigh.
>
> >MW: Dog names a class (universal, kind ...) (But of course
> the members are
> >different from Barry's).
>
> So no distinction between a universal and its extension? (05)
MW: Not found a use for any distinction yet. (06)
> And shouldn't that be
>
> 'Dog' names a class (07)
MW: Indeed.
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > "All dogs are animals."
> > >
> > > for all x, if x instance_of dog then x instance_of animal
> > >
> > > for short:
> > > dog is_a animal
> >
> >MW: Agreed (but remembering there are two "dog"s).
>
>
> So two Fidos? Does Bill Clinton have two daughters? (08)
MW: You missinterpret. I mean there are two dog classes, one with my
4D extents, and one with your 3D continuant. If we don't distinguish these
classes, then we could indeed double count. Of course you have two
daughters of Bill Clinton anyway with her living process and her continuant,
but that is your problem.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > "Dog is a ..." (if that's even allowed)
> > >
> > > In BFO we pass over the issue of second-order universals for the
> > > immediate future.
> >
> >MW: Dog instance_of class_of_organism
> >
> >MW: Being a data model, ISO 15926 has entity types that have
> instances,
> >hence instance_of here rather than classified_by elswhere.
> >Classified_by is used when both the class and its member are
> instances
> >of entity types. This is just an artefact of the
> representation formalism.
> >There is no ontological difference between instance_of and
> classified_by.
> > >
> > > Some more:
> > > Fido is sleeping
> > >
> > > There is some x, Fido agent_of x and x instance_of sleeping event
> > > (occurrent particular)
> >
> >MW: There is some x that is a state (temporal part of) fido.
> >
> >MW: x classified_as sleeping
> > >
> > > sleeping is a process
> > >
> > > sleeping is_a process (occurrent)
> >
> >MW: sleeping is_a(n) activity
> >
> >MW: sleeping instance_of class_of_activity
> >
> >MW: I anticipate activity and process are synonyms under their
> >intended meaning here, though again, since the members seem
> to be distinct
> >they are somehow the same but different. (I don't think
> Barry would allow
> >that the sleeping process is a temporal part of Fido as a
> physical object,
> >though he would probably allow a second Fido Living Process
> that would relate,
> >but would not be a physical object as an ISO 15926 Fido would be).
>
> Yes. I talk to biologists. I have learned to distinguish between an
> organism and its life. (09)
MW: Well I talk to myself, and I am my living process. (This is really
just about the conditions for identity you adopt). (010)
> BS
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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 (011)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (012)
|