- From: Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:00:09 -0700
- To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>, "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
- CC: SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
Referring of course to Ontology as the study of being. I have not read Goedel. D On 7/31/07 4:54 PM, "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com> wrote: > Peter: > > That jives with my beliefs, as crooked and warped as they may be. > > ;-) > > /d > > > On 7/31/07 2:13 PM, "Peter F Brown" <peter@pensive.eu> wrote: > >> Duane: >> You are right. This goes to the heart of the issue of "vicious circularity" >> that Whitehead and Russell had thought was sorted with Principia Mathematica, >> until Kurt Gödel came along and demolished their shiny, perfect, world. An >> ontology is not just some self-referencing and self-sustaining model that is >> somehow "complete"; it points out to the real world, as you rightly say. >> >> Before there is a flame war on this, I should underline that we discussed >> this >> extensively at the Ontology Summit, and there was an (uncomfortable for some) >> consensus that there is "Ontology" as *the* study of being; and there are >> "ontologies" that are domain-specific encapsulations of some aspect of the >> real world. >> >> Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@ontolog.cim3.net >> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@ontolog.cim3.net] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull >> Sent: 31 July 2007 16:05 >> To: [ontolog-forum]; John F. Sowa >> Cc: 'SW-forum' >> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer Cake >> >> >> >> >> On 7/31/07 12:46 PM, "Azamat" <abdoul@cytanet.com.cy> wrote: >> >>> The real semantics or meanings of any symbolism or notation is defined by >>> ontology; for this is the only knowledge domain studying the Being of >>> Everything which is, happens and relates. >> >> Not trying to start a nit picky argument, but I had always thought that real >> semantics are defined by how a term is used and what it is linked to in a >> physical world (which of course can be captured and expressed in an >> ontology). Otherwise any ontology is just a huge circular reference (like >> the english dictionary when void of any grounding. >> >> How can one define and convey the true meaning of spicy food, heat, pain etc >> without the corresponding grounding experience? >> >> Duane -- ********************************************************************** "Speaking only for myself" Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury MAX 2007 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/07/adobe-max-2007.html **********************************************************************
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 13:04:45 UTC