KIF SUO: Re: Basic Terminology
Robert E. Kent wrote:
>
> John et al,
>
> Attached is a PDF file giving a table
> with the various syntactic and semantic
> components of 1st order logic.
>
> Robert E. Kent
> rekent@ontologos.org
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Robert,
I only have a moment to write, but just for the sake
of future reference and mutual undertanding, I would
describe the "semantic" component of the scheme that
you have given us as a case of a "formal semantics".
I hate having to keep referring to intellectual or
any other kind of history in this "eternal agora",
but if you go back to Frege and to Peirce and work
your way forward you will find that the struggle
to attain a formal semantics was a hard-fought
battle and well worth the effort, but that its
results by no means cover everything that was
regarded as the full "study of meaning" (SOM)
at the time when this noble endeavor began.
So the best that I can probably arrange to
do within the scope of my own usage is to
continue to use your word "semantics" with
the constant attachment of the qualifying
adjective "formal". I plan to elaborate
on the relationship between this kind of
"formal and rational meaning" (FARM) and
"substantial and empirical meaning" (SAEM),
and whether this particular polarity ought,
as a matter of actual fact, be contemplated
as encompassing all of the sorts of meaning
that there are, must be, or even might be.
But this new order of discussion may need
to be carried on elsewhere, perhaps.
Many Regards,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤