Re: Consolidating triple/edges -- named occurrence version

Thank you for the further examples, and for this reference (timely for
my freshly brewed cup of tea)! This is quite elucidating!

As far as I can see this confirms much of my intuitions; such that our
"occurrences of triples" are really that which are "in virtue of" (or
claims/entails/necessitates/projects//implicates/makes for) triples
(one or many); such as events and any other "(sub)states of affairs"
(but now I need to be careful again to avoid overreaching with words
that may imply too much).

There may be something to these truth-makers which might be too strong
though -- if I describe something as a truth-maker, do I state that it
exists, and thus its implications? I suppose it depends on the nature
of the thing (a document or an event for instance)? Do we want only
the weakest form of them in the core semantics, and leave the stronger
forms (I state an event thus what truths it makes) to additional
semantics? (I may need more tea...)

Cheers,
Niklas

On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 12:34 PM Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
>
> Some reference from philosophy - if you want to get lost in it :-)
>
> Guarino, N., Sales, T.P., Guizzardi, G. (2018).
> Reification and Truthmaking Patterns.
> In: Trujillo, J., et al. Conceptual Modeling - ER 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11157. Springer.
> https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00847-5_13
> (attached)
>

Received on Friday, 5 January 2024 13:35:33 UTC