Re: Topic :> Dynamics Of Ontologies

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Topic :> Dynamics Of Ontologies 14

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Example 1.  Prognostic Signs And Symptoms (cont.)

The text for analysis is taken from the early history
of clinical reasoning, in which we find the following
aphorism of Hippocrates:

| Delirium with laughter is less dangerous;
| combined with seriousness it is more so.

>From a systems-theoretic point of view, this text is one small component
of a larger corpus of texts, the whole of which sign system reflects the
state of information that a certain community of interpretation has with
regard to its determinate object system.  Thus, we have a relation among
three systems:  an object system, a sign system, an interpreting system.
>From a realistic standpoint, our main interest is directed towards the
real states of these three systems.  That is to say, if there is any
"knowledge" embodied or reflected in a particular syntactic system,
it is because of the relation that the sign system makes between
the real states of the object system and the real states of the
interpreting system.

Keeping all that in mind, if far at the back
for the moment, let us return to the Example.

The text can be paraphrased in simple propositional form as follows:

| if delirum then:
|
| if laughter then less_dangerous;
|
| if seriousness then more_dangerous.

This parapphrase calls for a vocabulary of five logical qualities:
{delirium, laughter, less_dangerous, more_dangerous, seriousness}.

Using concatenation for conjunction and parentheses for negation,
the text can be paraphrased once again in the folllowing fashion:

( delirium    (
( laughter    ( less_dangerous ))
( seriousness ( more_dangerous )) ))

Let us suppose that we take any one of these texts as an
expression of our Initial Theory about the object domain.
But that appears to place us slightly ahead of ourselves,
at least, as far inquiry into the salient phenomena goes,
in effect, skipping ahead to Node 2 of the Figure below.

o-----------------------------------------------------------o
|                                                           |
|                           Phenomenon                      |
|                                o                          |
|                                 >                         |
|                                  >                        |
|                                   >                       |
|                               Observation                 |
|                                     >                     |
|                                      >                    |
|                                       >                   |
|                                        >    Descriptive   |
|                            Induction    >   Data          |
|       Initial Model  3---------5-------->1  =             |
|                     ^                 < ^   Ideal         |
|                    ^               <   ^    Model         |
|                   ^             <     ^                   |
|                  ^           <       ^                    |
|      Deduction  ^     Abduction     ^  Deduction          |
|                ^       <           ^                      |
|               ^     <             ^                       |
|              ^   <               ^                        |
|             ^ <                 ^                         |
|   Initial  2---------4-------->o  Ideal                   |
|   Theory       Clarification      Theory                  |
|                                                           |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
Figure 3.  Dynamics of Inquiry

Of course, from the way that this particular corpus of texts has been
handed down to us, we are given the theory already in writing but we
do not necessarily have any of the things that went into producing
the theory, for example, the acquaintance with the corresponding
phenomena, the experience of the physician, or the descriptive
data that may have been summarized in these empirical rules.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o