Re: SUO: Re: Sign Relations & Communication
From: "Cathy Legg" <clegg@cyc.com>
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Seth Russell wrote:
>
> > > In general I would be loath to take Peirce's concept of the
interpretant
> > > of a sign and turn it into an explicit piece of formalism (which then
> > > would require its own interpretation). As I understand it, what
> > > interpretations a particular sign is giving rise to now, and will give
> > > rise to in the future, always remains an open question, and thus
cannot
> > > be formalised. (Messy, I know).
> >
> > Well yes if we consider only human minds. But computers are quite
different
> > ... we can put a diagram of their interpertation of some predicament
inside
> > their databases and then contrive with programs that they behave
according
> > to their master's interpretation of that diagram :)
>
> In what sense is this really an interpretation, though?
I don't know .. you would need to tell me what 'really an interpertation'
means to you.
All I'm saying is that if you can take a system that is composed of
(database + programs) and design it to respond to strings of language signs,
then the (database + programs) is indeed sitting in the Interpertant slot of
Pierce's sign relation. And, if you can stretch you imagination to believe
that any program is a formalism, then we were 'loath', but we did turn
Pierce's Interpertant into a formalism.
Perhaps it doesn't feel right to you because the Interpretation is then
subjective to the particular (database + program) and is not some objective,
mathematically ideal, context insensitive thing. But that's too bad
.....'what interpretations a particular sign is giving rise to now, and will
give rise to in the future', *will* 'always remains an open question'
relative to a particular Interpertant. That *is* an essential nature of one
of Pierce's sign relations. Is it not?
> > > Apologies if I am missing something.
> >
> > Not at all ... it's quite a privilege to finally exchange words with
someone
> > from CycCorp. When are we to get the new open cyc modules ?
>
> Unfortunately the exact date when OpenCyc will emerge is yet to be
> decided. However I can assure you that selected Cycorp employees are
> currently working hard on it.
Why does it have to be so perfect upon release .. why can't you just get it
out here and let the community muck around with it ?
Seth Russell