ONT Re: Extension x Comprehension = Information
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Jean-Luc,
I have added your recent remarks to the file of comments
that I am striving to work my way through. In scanning
through the lot of it, however, I do notice many errors
of reading that I think could be avoided if you were to
slow down and take the time to read things with care.
My initial report to the IEEE SUO Group
on this subject was prefaced as follows:
| SUO WG Members,
|
| If you are looking for a new perspective on that
| fearful symmetry between extension and intension,
| and want to see the bearing of a precursory idea
| of information on doing so then you may find the
| following series of excerpts from Peirce's early
| lectures of some interest: ...
That states fairly well my intention and my "original subject",
as you say, and I will exert myself more faithfully in future
to be sure that it does not "get completely lost in comments
of comments about details and hair splitting", as you say.
But I intuit that I must continue to continue with this discussion
on the more general, the more generous, and the much more genteel
Ontology list, "Walden Pond" as I like to imagine it, especially
since the attention span afforded by the hue and cry of the more
Officious list, "Walled_In_Pond" comes to mind, scarcely ever
permits much in the way of careful and extended conversation
about "methodological, pragmatic, technical" (MPT) matters.
I will not use that list for serious MPT discussion.
I suggest we proceed as I recommended once before,
that we consider that philistine list an email
extension of our amazingly productive exchange,
and the IEEE list the place where we report
results and take comments. Ultimately, it
is there -- the IEEE list -- where the work
we do will be accepted/rejected for SUO use
and for IEEE standardization, and this is
a critical point to make. The philistine
list simply allows us to focus on making
a more cogent proposal without so many
distractions as the open world nit-
picks each point we discuss.
Syncerely Yours,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤