- From: David Sallach <sallach@uchicago.edu>
- Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 14:47:36 -0600
- To: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
- Cc: David Sallach <sallach@uchicago.edu>, cg@cs.uah.edu, Ontology <ontology@ieee.org>, Ontoweb <seweb-list@cs.vu.nl>, W3C Web Ontology WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>, RDF <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, protege-discussion <protege-discussion@smi.stanford.edu>, Arisbe <arisbe@stderr.org>, Gdsemiocom <gdsemiocom@univ-perp.fr>, Robert E Kent <rekent@ontologos.org>
At 08:24 AM 4/2/02 -0500, Jon Awbrey wrote: > >I believe that some aspects of situation theory will be covered by the IFF approach, >about which I'm sure you will hear more anon among the SUO e-missals. I'll look forward to learning more about the IFF approach. >As far as the >general recognition of situated attitudes in logic and semiotic goes, C.S. Peirce, >of course, got there long ago. And although the S&A floks have made some valiant >attempts to break out of the pre-veiling Fregean mold, they might have purchased >their fungicide wholesale if only they had made slightly more thorough inquiries >at Peirce's Emporium. I have enormous respect for Peirce, and agree that his relational orientation would have provided a firm foundation for the work subsequently done in situation theory. Nonetheless, identifying the situation as a first-class seems to me to have been an important contribution to the modeling of dynamic social processes. > . . . >Welcome to the program of disruption already in progress ... > Thanks for your comments. David
Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2002 16:44:15 UTC