[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontac-forum] Re: owl:Class and owl:Thing

To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Hans Teijgeler <hans.teijgeler@xxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Chris Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:28:38 -0500
Message-id: <20060405182838.GI900@xxxxxxxx>
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 06:37:45PM +0300, Azamat wrote:
> ''What exactly did you have in mind when you referred to "n-relational 
> ontology of things"? <HT/>
> Hans:
> Relations should be analyzed not only with respect to the number of terms 
> they connect and formal properties as cardinality, symmetry, transitivity, 
> reflexivity. This is all the subject of a formal relational logic. As old 
> as Russell statement that 'every proposition should be regarded as 
> expressing a relation between two and more things', like in the from R(x, 
> y, z,...).    (01)

It's hard to believe Russell ever said any such thing, as he (with
Whitehead) wrote Principia Mathematica, the language of which includes
not only atomic (relational) statements but boolean and quantified
statements as well.    (02)

Chris Menzel    (03)

Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG    (04)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>