Re: SUO: Re: Proposed SUO Content Outline
John, Chris P. et al,
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>; <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 9:21 AM
Subject: 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.
<snip>
> 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.
I believe that a more precise version of this 4th alternative (call it the
IFF alternative), formulated in "the non-natural language of mathematics"
and definitely intended to be "a 'disruptive' technology that leads to
significant changes in the way we classify and conceptualize the world",
would be the following idea previously mentioned in message
[http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg01758.html].
IFF. A framework is created for the *truth concept lattice* generated from
the *truth classification of a first-order language L* -- whose instances
are L-structures, whose types are L-sentences, and whose classification
relation is satisfaction. In place of the theories of alternative 4 above
are the formal concepts of this lattice. A formal concept in this lattice
has an intent which is a closed theory (set of sentences) and an extent
which is the collection of all models for that theory. The theory (intent)
of the join (sup) of two concepts is the closure of the intersection of the
theories (conceptual intents), and the theory (intent) of the meet (inf) of
two concepts is the theory of the common models. Suitable set-theoretic
foundational concerns are covered in a Foundation ontology. I advocate the
Information Flow Framework (IFF) as this framework. More specifically, I
advocate application of IFF as a structuring methodology at the metalevel
for SUO. I am in the process of formulating in SUO-KIF (see the ontologos
site [http://www.ontologos.org/IFF/IFF.html]) suitable interconnected
meta-ontologies for this: meta-ontologies for Foundations, Spans,
Categories, Sets, Classifications, Hypergraphs, etc. I believe that this IFF
alternative will provide "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."
Robert E. Kent
rekent@ontologos.org