RE: SUO: RE: A proposed SUO content outline - roles
Mark,
You seem to be treating 'exist' here as a predicate. Maybe this is one way
of managing different world-views (though I think more work would be
required) - but within each world view surely there would only be one exists
'predicate'.
Regards,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
[mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mark Pierre
Richards
Sent: 07 March 2001 06:27
To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: Re: SUO: RE: A proposed SUO content outline - roles
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Partridge <chris_partridge@csi.com>
To: Douglas McDavid <mcdavid@us.ibm.com>;
<standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 09:00
Subject: RE: SUO: RE: A proposed SUO content outline - roles
[...]
>
> I am now writing this email at my desk. Under the immaterialist view
there
> 'exist' two things - my desk and the region it occupies. Under the
> materialist view there only 'exists' one. It seems to me difficult
to build
> an ontology that can say that it is true both that 'there is one
thing' and
> 'that there are two things', with ending up with a contradiction -
and I
> would be *very* interested in knowing how this can be done.
>
[...]
But you can say 'there exist_1 one thing_1' and 'there exist_2 two
thing_2', where exist_1, thing_1, exist_2, thing_2 do not obviously
have the same definitions, in the 'language' Ian Niles is proposing
and in the 'framework' John Sowa is considering (if the two are not
really the same thing).
Mark