SUO: Re: Examples! Examples! Examples!
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
EEE. Note 29
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Example 1. John Sowa's "Top Level Categories" (cont.)
With a little more thought it seems clear that the complex feature
definitions in proposition !b! need to be supplemented with a set
of constraints that describe the partitions of the intended space
along the three dimensions (1) {Independent, Relative, Mediating},
(2) {Physical, Abstract}, and (3) {Continuant, Occurrent} in order
to have a chance of constituting a sole sufficient axiom for TLC.
Table 17 presents one way of doing this,
as expressed in Proposition !c! (gamma).
Table 17. TLC in Cactus Language: Proposition !c!
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
| |
| (( Independent ),( Relative ),( Mediating )) |
| |
| (( Physical ),( Abstract )) |
| |
| (( Continuant ),( Occurrent )) |
| |
| (( Actuality , Independent Physical )) |
| (( Form , Independent Abstract )) |
| (( Prehension , Relative Physical )) |
| (( Proposition , Relative Abstract )) |
| (( Nexus , Mediating Physical )) |
| (( Intention , Mediating Abstract )) |
| |
| (( Object , Independent Physical Continuant )) |
| (( Process , Independent Physical Occurrent )) |
| (( Schema , Independent Abstract Continuant )) |
| (( Script , Independent Abstract Occurrent )) |
| (( Juncture , Relative Physical Continuant )) |
| (( Participation , Relative Physical Occurrent )) |
| (( Description , Relative Abstract Continuant )) |
| (( History , Relative Abstract Occurrent )) |
| (( Structure , Mediating Physical Continuant )) |
| (( Situation , Mediating Physical Occurrent )) |
| (( Reason , Mediating Abstract Continuant )) |
| (( Purpose , Mediating Abstract Occurrent )) |
| |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
Generally speaking, a dichotomous division, exclusive disjunction,
or logical inequivalence between two logical features X and Y can
be expressed as "(X, Y)", but I used a more indirect form for the
the distinctions {Physical, Abstract} and {Continuant, Occurrent}
due to the leftmost-shallowest variable casing order of the Model
function in Theme One, simply to give the program a better chance
of displaying the logical features in the customary order of 'KR'.
Here is the outline of models for Proposition !c!,
expressed in terms of positive features, as often
serves in these families of partitioned universes:
Table 18. Summary of "Model" Output for the Proposition !c!
o---------o-------------------------------------------------o
| | |
| I | Independent |
| IP | Physical |
| IPC | Continuant |
| | Actuality |
| | Object <1> |
| IPO | Occurrent |
| | Actuality |
| | Process <2> |
| IA | Abstract |
| IAC | Continuant |
| | Form |
| | Schema <3> |
| IAO | Occurrent |
| | Form |
| | Script <4> |
| R | Relative |
| RP | Physical |
| RPC | Continuant |
| | Prehension |
| | Juncture <5> |
| RPO | Occurrent |
| | Prehension |
| | Participation <6> |
| RA | Abstract |
| RAC | Continuant |
| | Proposition |
| | Description <7> |
| RAO | Occurrent |
| | Proposition |
| | History <8> |
| M | Mediating |
| MP | Physical |
| MPC | Continuant |
| | Nexus |
| | Structure <9> |
| MPO | Occurrent |
| | Nexus |
| | Situation <10> |
| MA | Abstract |
| MAC | Continuant |
| | Intention |
| | Reason <11> |
| MAO | Occurrent |
| | Intention |
| | Purpose <12> |
| | |
o---------o-------------------------------------------------o
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o