Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Re: Axiomatic ontology

To: standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: Axiomatic ontology
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@BESTWEB.NET>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 03:11:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1201505238.479d83d63468c@webmail.helsinki.fi>
List-Help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STANDARD-UPPER-ONTOLOGY>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STANDARD-UPPER-ONTOLOGY>
List-Owner: <mailto:STANDARD-UPPER-ONTOLOGY-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:STANDARD-UPPER-ONTOLOGY-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:STANDARD-UPPER-ONTOLOGY-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
References: <1201505238.479d83d63468c@webmail.helsinki.fi>
Sender: standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)

Avril,

I'm not disagreeing about that:

AS> The axiomatic method can, and does, actually simplify things.

What I objected to is that idea that Descartes's cogito might
somehow be required, helpful, or useful for the axiomatic method.

John

References:
- Re: Axiomatic ontology
  - From: Avril Styrman <Avril.Styrman@HELSINKI.FI>

Prev by Date: Re: Axiomatic ontology. Was: D1. Separate computer science ontology from philosophical ontology
Next by Date: RE: Axiomatic ontology
Prev by thread: Re: Axiomatic ontology
Next by thread: Re: Axiomatic ontology
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread