SUO: Re: Lifecycle Integration Schema
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
LIS. Discussion Note 81
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
JA = Jon Awbrey
MW = Matthew West
JA: My question is: How can we be assured that you are
collating dimensions, and not just conflating them?
MW: Well if the property is in the axiom, then it may just be
that it is the piece of work that is left, since we only
have taxonomic and structural axioms at present.
MW: To put it another way, what is a property?
JA: I will adduce a few standard bits of wisdom to the account later on,
but in the theory of intensions, qualities, properties, or whatever
that I am currently trying, somewhat off the cuff, to explain here.
a property, like sweetness, is commonly recognized by many speakers
and thinkers as an abstract object of discussion and thought, and
I am just trying to figure out if the LIS_underscored concept of
an abstract_object has any clear relation to this classical idea
of an abstract object.
MW: And how is this different from a concept?
JA: A concept is a sign.
A property is an object.
MW: So the concept is what we actually store to
represent the property "out there", right?
That's the way I think of it. The way I understand it, it's what's
implied by calling something an "object", whether abstract, concrete,
physical, or possible, though I will have to think more on the possible.
The idea of "objectivity", or that something is "objective", means that it
has a certain quality of "out-there-ness", which means that others out there
can recognize the same object or objective as having a reality in the outer
world, that is to say, outside the world of our personal interior theatre.
Some people will take this quality of out-there-ness quite literally,
others will take it as a convenient or conventional figure of speech --
either way, it doesn't really change the way they actually speak all
that much, standardly treating property names as grammatical subjects
and, as all of my grammar school teachers taught, grammatical objects.
We may ask: Is that particular style of speech useful or valuable?
That is what I call a "pragmatic question".
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o