SUO: On the supreme supertype -- RE: RE: RE: RE: On the relevance of EXPRESS, EPISTLE, etc. to SUO
Dear Matthew,
> > > > > MW: In EPISTLE we modestly claim that the EPISTLE Core Model can
> > > > > represent "life the universe and everything" (well almost).
> > > >
> > > > PJ: OK, how about the phrase "life, the universe and everything"
> > > > as another
> > > > "challenge concept"? How would you represent this in EPISTLE?
> > >
> > > MW: Well I guess the simple answer is "thing" our supreme
> > > supertype. That of
> > > course is the set of all things, which includes classes and
> > > relations and so
> > > on.
> >
> > PJ: OK, I'll accept this answer for "everything" :-)
On further thought, I'd like to suggest a different possible name for the
supreme supertype, other than "thing" or "entity" which seem to be
traditional...
Perhaps a better word for the supreme supertype could be "referent", meaning
that which can be referenced.
I'm thinking along the following lines: Whatever cannot be referenced cannot
be described and hence cannot be categorized or placed in an ontology. Of
that which cannot be referenced, we must be silent...
This is just a thought-- I am not dogmatic about it, and don't see it as a
major issue if people continue using "thing" or "entity" as the supreme
supertype. I'd be interested in people's responses pro or con.
Regards,
Phil
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is
limited. Imagination encircles the world." - Einstein
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Disclaimers. www.philjackson.prohosting.com