SUO: Re: Finding an upper ontology
[forwarded to SUO as Stephen is not a member and his posting didn't get thru]
Objet:
[semanticweb] RE: Finding an upper
ontology
Date:
Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:41:36 -0400
De:
"Downes, Stephen" <Stephen.Downes@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
A:
"'John F. Sowa '" <sowa@bestweb.net>,
'Jean-Luc Delatre ' <jld@club-internet.fr>
Copies à:
'Erik Larson ' <elarson_78746@yahoo.com>,
"'West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE '" <matthew.west@shell.com>,
'Mike Pool ' <mpool@iet.com>,
'Cathy Legg ' <clegg@cyc.com>,
'Eric Peterson ' <epeterson@CCAAVA.com>,
"'standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org '" <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>,
"Downes, Stephen" <Stephen.Downes@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>,
"'semanticweb@yahoogroups.com '" <semanticweb@yahoogroups.com>,
"'cg@cs.uah.edu '" <cg@cs.uah.edu>
Hiya,
2. For starters, the only universal point we can all agree to
is a one-category ontology, which contains nothing but the
empty node at the top. That is a start, but not a very
useful one.
By the 'empty node' do you mean 'nothing' or do you mean 'the empty set'?
Nothing, as in the absence of a thing, or empty, as in a(n imaginary) container
with no members?
If we take the empty node, and place it inside a similarly empty node, do we now
have the equivalent of one of the original empty nodes, or do we have something
that is now a non-empty node?
We can have first principles if we wish, but first principles are not matters of
discovery, they are matters of agreement, and on some things - even so simple as
the characterization of nothing - there may not be agreement, not, at least, if
both parties to the discussion understand what follows from such first principles.
Experience is like a large jugsaw puzzle, all the pieces scatted on the table in front
of us. Some people insist that the only proper way to start is with a corner piece.
Others prefer to start at an edge. Others prefer to find pieces of similar colour, or
similar shape, and build from within.
In jigsaws, this is no problem. In experience, if you start in one place, you get one
picture, and if you start in another place, you get another picture. Which picture
is 'correct'? There is no way to tell: all we have is experience, and ways of putting
it together.
-- Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Downes ~ Researcher ~ National Research Council Canada
Moncton ~ Canada ~ stephen@d... ~ http://www.downes.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------