Re: SUO: Re: Proposed SUO Content Outline
Pat,
I like your statement of the three possible outcomes of this
effort, but I want to add a fourth, which I believe is much
easier to attain than #1, much less dangerous than #2, and
more hopeful than #3.
>There are several possible outcomes of the SUO effort.
>1. A single, usable, well-designed, universal upper ontology is
>created within which all other (or most other, or enough other to be
>highly useful) ontologies can be fitted, thereby enabling
>inter-translation, conformity, productivity and putting an end to
>petty confusions.
>2. A 'standard' upper ontology is created which is a shambles, being
>a mishmash of ill-digested ideas, incompatible hidden assumptions and
>so on, and is much more harm than utility; but it is given an IEEE
>primateur, and becomes thereby widely adopted as a 'standard', and
>acquires the practical force of law (like Microsoft Word, use of
>which is now enforced by many federal government decrees.)
>3. The whole enterprise is eventually abandoned, but everyone
>involved has learned quite a lot about ontologies, one way or
>another. (There are plenty of examples of this, eg the Japanese '5th
>generation' initiative, and the US 'supercomputer center' plan, not
>to mention the space race.)
I also agree with the following observations:
>Adam and Ian have 1. in mind, which I think is impossible. I believe
>3. is the most likely outcome; but above all, I want to stop 2.
>happening. My major fear is that many of the SUO enthusiasts don't
>know the difference between 1. and 2.
The fourth alternative, which I have argued for during all the
ontology workshops sponsored by the T2 committee, in my KR book,
and in many notes to the SUO group is the following:
4. A framework is created which can support an open-ended
number of theories (potentially infinite) organized in
a lattice together with systematic metalevel techniques for
moving from one to another, for testing their adequacy for
any given problem, and for mixing, matching, combining, and
transforming them to whatever form is appropriate for whatever
problem anyone is trying to solve.
The most complete formulation I have written so far (which is
still very incomplete) is in my KR book, especially at the end
of the Knowledge Soup chapter. I will be revising and restating
much of that material and reposting it on my web site. As time
and progress permits, I'll send further reports to the SUO list.
And by the way, lattices, categories, differentiable manifolds,
and semiotics are involved in this effort. But I hope I can
explain them in a way that doesn't frighten people or horses.
John Sowa