Dear Martin and Mika, This is also in line with how we can talk about models in the mind as opposed to expressed (mediated) models. In digital humanities we tends to focus on models as things. Another approach is cognitive studies of models in the mind, which is, as said, much less tangible and much less known (and knowable) as to how they are instantiated. See, e.g., Nersessian, Nancy J. Creating Scientific Concepts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2008.
Regards, Øyvind 20. feb. 2016 kl. 19:20 skrev martin <[email protected]>: > Dear Mika, > > I support your separation of the world of things and the world of minds. I > think it is crucial to understand this > relationship, which is highly complex. See also "Embodiment" by Wolfgang > Tschacher et al. who provides ample > evidence of a much tighter interaction than classical AI and philosophy had > assumed. > We develop the CRM strictly on an empirical-scientific base. The idea being, > that the world of minds > is accessible to our interpretation through the world of things, as long as > we do not resort to telepathy. > This can be utterances, bodily expressions, activities that allow us to infer > motivations or inconsistencies > with uttered convictions etc. , nowadays even "liedetectors" or brain > activation images. > The latter fall under the current scope of the CRM, if relevant groups > document in data structures such terms. > > It is much more difficult to talk about clearly identifiable entities for the > world of the mind, and therefore > rarely appear as datastructures useful to integrate knowledge on. For > instance, Stephen Hennicke has > discussed recently in his PhD the concept of actual "will" to pursue a plan > in contrast to "expressions of will". > Recently, it appears to me more and more important to understand the world of > the mind not just as isolated > individuals caught in their own brains, but as members of a social group > which exchange their inner experiences and > influence each other by their attitudes up to the degree of global changes of > behavior. > > In addition, social-historical research has a strong focus on collective > behavior, which can only be described > in statistical terms, formal or informal. Whereas the KR formalism allows to > describe facts feeding statistics, > the statistics and its models are mathematically different. Therefore the CRM > simply cannot deal with them technically. > > As a remark, I'd argue that "Subject" in both senses, the experiencing human > or the topic of an information object, > is not a class, but must be modelled as relationship? > > Best, > > Martin > > On 20/2/2016 3:39 πμ, Mika Nyman wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> Some pieces of information and comments: >> >> 1. For information on how to apply CIDOC CRM or FRBRoo to Intangible >> Cultural Heritage, this is the right list. >> >> CIDOC has also a Working Group for Intangible Cultural Heritage. If someone >> has a broader interest in how to document ICH, that can be discussed on the >> mailing list of that group. The CIDOC ICH WG aims to develop a vocabulary, >> standards and guidlines for documentation of ICH. The chair of the WG is Dr. >> Manvi Seth from the National Museum Institute, New Delhi, >> [email protected]. If you want to be added to the mailing list of the >> WG, please send me a note to [email protected] and I will >> send you an invitation to join the list. I have myself only a minor role in >> the group, but I administer the mailing list. >> >> 2. A while ago (in 2012) I participated in a project to create a conceptual >> model for archives in Finland. My specific interest was to connect that >> model to the CIDOC CRM and the FRBRoo. The project was based on the >> conviction, that the foundation for a conceptual model for archives is the >> mandate, discourse and practices of archives and the archives community. In >> other words, the starting point was not existing metadata schemata and how >> to map those to other schemata, but rather what archivists think and do and >> how they see their professional roles within their national archival >> tradition compared to the archival traditions in other countries. In >> parallel, there were separate processes to create cataloguing rules, to >> create a data model for a new information system and to link archival data >> to the Finna service, which is a national version of Europeana. >> >> In one of the models that were produced in that project, the archival >> classes were distributed among five fields: >> >> Temporal Entities >> Extents (in space and time) >> Three types of Persistent Items: >> - Actors >> - Things >> - Conceptual Objects >> >> These five fields are derived from the CIDOC CRM. A disturbing feature was >> that some classes such as Activity and Subject crossed the border of fields. >> In the draft model they belong in some way to Temporal Entities, in another >> way to Conceptual Objects. After the conclusion of the project I wanted to >> look deeper into this. To get more clarity to the duality of classes like >> Activity and Subject I have been working on a domain independent Metamodel >> that can be applied to CIDOC CRM, FBRBoo and archival models. >> >> Two terms I use in the Metamodel are the World of Things and the World of >> Minds. An example: In the last days there has been student protests in Delhi >> and all over India caused by the arrest of a student leader, Kanhaiya Kumar >> from the Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi. Those demonstrations can be >> documented on two levels: in the World of Things as external activities but >> also in the World of Minds in the subjective field(s). The World of Things >> and the World of Minds form separate contexts. Different structures apply to >> each of them. Each must be approached through a different set of questions. >> A question like "What did NN really mean" is related to the World of Minds. >> "Who were the lawyers that physically assaulted and mishanled KK in the >> Patiala House Court" is related to the World of Things. The Internal >> Experience of Kanhaiya Kumar being kicked and beaten by enraged lawyers is >> different from the External Experience that can be captured by journalists' >> cameras, although Internal and External Experiences are interrelated. One >> distinction that is of relevance in the mental sphere is the distinction >> between Identification and Predication. Both are fundamental mental >> capabilities. A key interest in developing the Metamodel has been how to >> bridge statements and stories. Semantic web models and systems are statement >> oriented. Statements are based on Identification and Predication. They >> express our understanding of the world, but this understanding is, >> additionally, used in temporally sequenced discourses and narratives. >> >> My attempt has not been to present or describe the Metamodel here. I'm >> trying to formulate these thoughts in an article for the Iranian Farhang-e >> muse (Culture and Museum) journal. We (meaning especially some museum >> professionals in Iran) are also trying organize an international workshop in >> Teheran, where these questions could be discussed in depth. This workshop >> could be hosted by the University of Art in Teheran. If you have the >> interest and opportunity to participate in the workshop individually or >> through your project or organization, please let me know. There has also >> been a suggestion to arrange a Workshop in Teheran specifically on the theme >> of ICH. These two initiatives could be merged. >> >> >> These comments fall outside of the scope of refining the CICOC CRM model and >> its extensions. I apologize if they also fall outside of the scope of the >> CIDOC CRM mailing list. >> >> Best regards! >> Mika >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Mika Nyman, Suomenlinna Sea Fortress A3, 00190 Helsinki, Finland >> [email protected] >> puh/tel/phone +358 44 324 0004 >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> On 19.2.2016 12:43, Carlisle, Philip wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I’m resending this as it didn’t appear to get through. >>> >>> As you may know the Arches Project has been using the CRM as the >>> backbone for a cultural heritage inventory system. This is working well >>> and is being implemented by many projects. >>> >>> One such project now wants to use Arches to record intangible heritage >>> and so needs to create resource graphs, based on an ontology, in order >>> to do this. >>> >>> Can the CRM be used to represent the intangible heritage? If not does >>> anyone know of an ontology that can? >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> *Phil Carlisle* >>> >>> Data Standards Supervisor >>> Data Standards Unit, Listing Group >>> Historic England >>> The Engine House >>> Fire Fly Avenue >>> Swindon >>> SN2 2EH >>> >>> Tel: +44 (0)1793 414824 >>> >>> http://thesaurus.historicengland.org.uk/ >>> http://www.heritagedata.org/blog/ >>> >>> We are the public body that looks after England's historic environment. >>> We champion historic places, helping people to understand, value and >>> care for them, now and for the future. Sign up to our enewsletter to >>> keep up to date with our latest news, advice and listings. >>> HistoricEngland.org.uk Twitter: @HistoricEngland This e-mail (and any >>> attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are >>> not the views of Historic England unless specifically stated. If you >>> have received it in error, please delete it from your system and notify >>> the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in >>> any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to Historic >>> England may become publicly available. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Crm-sig mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 | > Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 | > | Email: [email protected] | > | > Center for Cultural Informatics | > Information Systems Laboratory | > Institute of Computer Science | > Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) | > | > N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, | > GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece | > | > Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl | > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >
