Re: Whole and Parts (and boundaries)
I heartily endorse John B's conclusion:
> I believe the linguistic data do give very useful indications
> of modelling decisions relevant for building ontologies, but
> only when listened to.
In general, I have much more confidence in the informal and
admittedly vague definitions given in large dictionaries,
such as the OED, Mirriam Webster's, etc., which are based on
actual data about how people use words, than in the formal
definitions of anybody's formal ontology (even my own).
I believe that logic is important, and I realize that formal
definitions are essential for computer theorem proving. But
I always emphasize the cautionary notes of a great logician,
Alfred North Whitehead. (See excerpts below.)
John Sowa
______________________________________________________________
Following are some quotations from [Whitehead's] last book,
_Modes of Thought_:
• “Both in science and in logic, you have only to develop your
argument sufficiently, and sooner or later you are bound to
arrive at a contradiction, either internally within the
argument, or externally in its reference to fact.”
• “The topic of every science is an abstraction from the full
concrete happenings of nature. But every abstraction neglects
the influx of the factors omitted into the factors retained.”
• “The premises are conceived in the simplicity of their
individual isolation. But there can be no logical test for
the possibility that deductive procedure, leading to the
elaboration of compositions, may introduce into relevance
considerations from which the primitive notions of the topic
have been abstracted.”
Whitehead certainly believed that logic is important, but he
also realized that it is only part of any comprehensive system
of learning, reasoning, and acting in and upon the world. He
summarized his position in one sentence: “We must be systematic,
but we should keep our systems open.” Logic is an excellent
means for reasoning about well defined knowledge, but by itself,
logic cannot make poorly defined terms precise or determine if
any relevant information is missing.
This is an excerpt from the Challenge of Knowledge Soup:
http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/challenge.htm