RE: What do the ontologists want from Emery, Pat on 2001-05-17 (www-rdf-logic@w3.org from May 2001)

From: Emery, Pat <pemery@grci.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 12:19:01 -0400
To: "'pat hayes'" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-ID: <09A65DF294F8D311AAB000105A02DBAF360964@thumper.va.grci.com>

Pat hayes wrote:
>>  'Jon says "The sky is blue"'
>>  'I believe Jon'
>>=>
>>  'I believe (the sky is blue)'

>Careful, those are two different senses of 'believe'. You don't 
>believe Jon is TRUE, right? You believe that what he SAYS is true. 
>Write that out and your example looks more, er, logical:
>
>Says(Jon,  (the sky is blue))
>Says(Jon, ?p) implies ?p.
>=>
>(the sky is blue)

Shouldn't it be something more like:

Says(Jon, (the sky is blue))
Says(Jon ?p) implies Believe(I, ?p))
=>
Believe(I, (the sky is blue))

Pat Emery

Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 12:19:37 UTC