ONT Re: cursiveness
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
okay, if that's what makes you happy, then i'm sure you'll love these:
1. definition = a sign of definitional equality adrift in a sea of words.
2. ontology = posh dictionary.
3. posh = descriptive of people who sit on deck, sipping mint juleps,
and prefer not to know what is really going on in the engine room.
i am so glad nobody's asking for a 'good' definition --
those are so much harder, requiring that the words
in the defining phrase actually be definitive,
not just descriptive.
of course, there are times when you cannot get an exact definition
and have to settle for more or less fitting descriptions, but you
ought to have a sense of when those times are and what's the diff.
i guess that i am basically problem-oriented. a problem picks me,
and i go looking for the tools that will help me find a solution.
it is too self-limiting and way too risky to keep ignoring every
problem that cannot be fixed up real quick with your pet set
of tools, and the sumo toolbox just does not have anything
in it with the kind of precision that i have come to need.
nor is the sumo grope likely to acquire these faculties
anyday soon, not until it's maintaining body develops
a modicum of respect for all of the standard material
that already exists out there, and not while it
continues to ignore all of the work that has
already been done, in fields far and wide.
jon awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Seth Russell wrote:
>
> From: "Jon Awbrey" <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
>
> > DM = Douglas McDavid
> >
> > DM: I don't think he's talking about computability.
> > I think he's talking about "computer program"
> > as an ontological category of things
> > of interest in the world.
>
> Yes :) Subsequently I found this in sumo:
>
> Procedure
> http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&skb=Merge&id=832
> ComputerProgram
> http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&skb=Merge&id=833
> (subclass ComputerProgram Procedure)
> (documentation ComputerProgram "A set of instructions in a computer
> programming language that can be executed by a computer.")
> (subclass Procedure Proposition)
> (documentation Procedure "A sequence-dependent specification. Some examples
> are &%ComputerPrograms, finite-state machines, cooking recipes, musical
> scores, conference schedules, driving directions, and the scripts of plays
> and movies.")
> (subclass ComputerProgram Procedure)
> (subclass Plan Procedure)
>
> > if a program falls in the forest,
> > and there's no machine to run it,
> > does that compute to you?
>
> No.
>
> > a computer program z is a thing of the genus 'sign'.
> > ultimately, it's a string of binary digits, z in B*.
> > if it is not intended as the control input sequence
> > to some machine, i do not know what the devil it is!
>
> I suppose a sumo:ComputerProgram is a sign where:
> string of bits = s (sign vehicle - the actual string of binary digits)
> computer = i (interpertant)
> computer behavior = o (object)
>
> According to sumo, it's also a proposition.
>
> Seth Russell
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤