SUO: Re: CYC Event vs. SUMO Process -- Really Different?
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> Jon,
> Thanks for the vituperation. What does this have to do with the
> suggestion I raised? Also I don't know why you're assuming things
> about who knows and doesn't know what they're talking about. You're
> the one sending in Lewis Carrolian tutorials on topics that I and many
> others learned about in graduate (and undergraduate) school years ago.
> Give me a break. If you have some substantive position about how the
> group should proceed, please offer it. Otherwise keep your rudeness
> to yourself.
Erik,
That remark about signing one's name was intended to be taken as a metaphor
for the relation that interpretive agents have to the semiotic processes of
which they are the agents. It rephrases in an idiomatic way (an easy spike
there) a theoretical postition that I have been maintaining persistently in
this forum for almost three years now. The point of it was recently made
more acute when Frank Farance brought up the notion of "stewardship" in
connection with the registry idea, a topic that touches on my own current
dissertation work on "frameworks, genres, and motifs of interpretation",
so I got all excited about the possibility of getting a new way to
explain the pertinence of those efforts. But shortly after being
raised, the whole thing was immediately reduced to a triviality,
in the knee-jerk 2-adic reductionist way of recent philosophies,
and there is a certain amount of pent-up frustration about the
idea that yet another signficant opportunity to evolve our
systems in the direction of adequacy to their objectives
and to the complexity of the actual phenomena is going
to go by the by.
I apologize for the carelessness of letting that sound like
a personal comment, as I am only responding to the position
that you seem to representing at this moment.
Jon Awbrey
JA: This is merely my attempt to extend an olive branch.
There is actually no real question in the relevant
research communities about the fundamental importance
and the "generic, meta, upper" utility of these very
first elements of scientific and technical concepts,
and this particular relation among events and logic
and sets has been a commonplace since Boole lumped
them all into the very same book. But if you want
to live in bubble, and think that you can ignore
the previous history of wisdom built into these
usages, then be my guest. Just sign your work
with your own name and do not drag down the
good names of others who know what they
are talking about.
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o