Re: SUO: Re: SUO Ballot with 2 Questions
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pierre Grenon" <pierre.grenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de>
To: "Jay Halcomb" <jhalcomb8@attbi.com>
Cc: <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 02:34
Subject: Re: SUO: Re: SUO Ballot with 2 Questions
PG> What is the motivation for having a multiplicity of ontologies in your
opinion
> and what motivates your agnosticism?
Basically, this: that they exist. Let us eliminate from our ontological
discussions everything but what is entirely unproblematic, unambiguous,
insensitive to context, and
uncontroversial. What remains? [TOP] (so to speak)? We can declare victory
and go home
wreathed in smiles.
On the other hand, the problems of intertranslatability, coherency,
competition and so
forth remain to be addressed anyway.
Since these are two different but related difficulties, let those who favor
either one adopt what approach they will. That is what the second ballot
measure proposes.
Jay