"tabula rasa" context & "diary" context

My "tabula rasa" context defines the most general concepts which are used to express all knowledge.  
Such concepts are called "axiomatic" concepts.  
For efficiency, I have also included some non-axiomatic concepts in tabula rasa.

Here is a hierarchy outline (a taxonomy) of the most important concepts in tabula rasa.

    existent
        entity
            animal
                person
            plant
            object
        characteristic
            attribute
                purpose
                space
                time
                view
            part
            action
            relation
        proposition

This structure is defined by a set of KR species-genus propositions,
which are part of the "first" set of propositions in a "diary" context.  
(For now, I am ignoring the "differentia" which distinguish the species of a genus.)

(1)    entity, characteristic, proposition iss existent
(2)    animal, plant, object iss entity
(3)    person iss animal
(4)    attribute, part, action, relation iss characteristic
(5)    purpose, space, time, view iss attribute

Further KR propositions can be expressed using these concepts, e.g.

(6)    Jane isu person
(7)    Jane has sex=female

From (6),(7) KR/KE automatically infers that

(8)    Jane has ctype=unit
(9)    sex iss attribute
(10)    female isu sex

Specifying the full meaning of a concept 
-- all the facts of reality it denotes 
-- all the extensions and intensions 
may require a large number of KR propositions.  
We can reduce that number by using genus-differentia definitions.
But for some concepts we won't be able to capture the full meaning  
-- the "diary" context will be "less than" the "full human" context .
Depending on our purpose, we may or may not care.
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart proposition list