Re: SUO: On the supreme supertype
I wrote:
> Aldo Gangemi wrote:
oops, sorry, Patrick Jackson wrote this...
> >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...
-chris