SUO: Re: Logic and Ontology
Ok, I think I see what you mean. But we could have chosen different KIF
predicates:
(hasState mycar red)
or from the other perspective
(instance mycar RedThings)
and or if time is a problem
(hasStateTimed mycar red 'March5:12:02AM')
(instanceTimed mycar RedThings 'March3:12:03AM')
So isn't the problem with the precision of the predicate we choose to use
and not with KIF predication itself? (Sorry I didn't take the time to look
up actual sumo predicates.)
Seth Russell
----- in response to -----
From: "West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE" <Matthew.R.West@IS.shell.com>
> Dear Seth,
>
> I am loath to try to descibe other peoples view of the world. You
> almost innevitably misrepresent them. Still subject to correction
> here goes.
>
> If you have what I would call a "property" view rather than a "set"
> view then you think that the properties that a thing has change
> over time, and that the things that have the property have changing
> membership. These properties therefore can't be sets (whose membership
> does not change) so when you say:
>
> (red mycar)
>
> you are not asserting set membership but something else. Whatever that
> is is what predicate means for those with that viewpoint.
>
> As a cross reference the 4D viewpoint would say that a state of the
> car was red, and that red was the set of all states that were red,
> past, present and future, so the membership is unchanging, actually
> time is taken out of the equation, and red really is a set.
>
>
> Matthew West
> Principal Consultant
> Shell Information Technology International Limited
> Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
> Email: matthew.r.west@is.shell.com
> Internet: http://www.shell.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Seth Russell [mailto:seth@robustai.net]
> > Sent: 05 March 2002 16:54
> > To: West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE; Standard-Upper-Ontology (E-mail)
> > Subject: Re: Logic and Ontology
> >
> >
> > From: "West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE" <Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com>
> >
> > > The bottom line here as far as I can see is that without stating
> > > a particular meaning for predication, KIF is ambiguous. Or perhaps
> > > I should say that when you use KIF, you need to state the meaning
> > > of predication you are using.
> >
> > Could you provide us with a tangible example giving differing
> > meanings of
> > predication?
> >
> > Seth Russell
> >
> >
>