RE: ONT Varieties Of Ontology -- Discussion

Dear Jon,

No catch, I'd just like to understand what you are trying to say.

I'm afraid I can't find either an example or a definition below.
Or at least nothing I find enlightening.

Let me try a guess.

ROSO: Based on Maths and pure science. Most accurate description
possible the main consideration.

ULTO: Based on a pragmatic engineering view of the world. Efficiency
and effectiveness of description under most circumstances the
prime consideration.

Anywhere close?


Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 15 December 2003 14:51
> To: Inquiry; Ontology; SemioCom
> Subject: ONT Varieties Of Ontology -- Discussion
> 
> 
> 
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> 
> VOO Discussion 1
> 
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> 
> MW = Matthew West
> 
> In: VOO.    http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/thrd1.html#05209
> Re: VOO 1.  http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg05209.html
> 
> MW: This is a good question.  But I do nto recall, and cannot
>     find quickly the distinction between a ROSO and an ULTO.
>     Could you provide a definition/description please?
> 
> Oh Ho!  I see you mean to have your revenge on me for my
> petty pedantic logical insistence on definitions, but it
> was precisely to pre-fudge the odds on this score that I
> adverted to the classical theme of definition by example.
> 
> Not only that, but this present business illustrates the
> poignancy of Peirce's observation that the extensions of
> concepts are apples in the minds' eyes of the respective
> conceivers, meaning that the apples that fall under your
> concept <Apple> may vary in their marks, whether natural
> or accidental, from the marks of the bunch under my tree.
> 
> Sub ROSO, then, let us severally and/or together think of all the
> research enterprises with which we severally and/or together have
> some experience and familiarity.  Then let us think of the brands
> of ontological assumptions that afford us the enabling can-do-its
> of these various and sundry lines and lives of inquiry.  And that
> will serve to stake out the tents of the traveling circus that we
> need to keep in mind, under the Big Top of the "research oriented
> scientific ontology".
> 
> Sub ULTO, then, let us severally and/or together think of all the
> soft peddled and all the hard knocked bits of information by slop
> and by dent of which we severally and/or together came to the Age
> and filled out the Vintage to know just barely enough to carry on
> these explorations in pure, applied, and/or self-applied research.
> 
> Now that is what I call a definition, so far as it can be divined.
> 
> For the time being,
> 
> Jon Awbrey
> 
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> 
>