On 2/4/2022 11:30 AM, George Bruseker wrote:
Following on this helpful new iteration of the thought by Martin maybe
a phrasing like 'in distinction to facts established directly through
/ at the level of material physical processes and interactions' is
more expressive of the content/intent?
I think this is much better!.
For me a socially constructed fact is a fact that does not correspond to
material interactions, but is based on propositional objects a certain
community maintains in an explicit form, typically codified. It is real
in the sense that the communication of the information is (must be)
observable, and people materially react or are forced by members of the
community to react in a specific way in applicable situations. I use to
connect the foreseen reactions to activity plans.
It is further important to be very precise and differentiated about the
subgroups or individuals formulating, adhering to, accepting, tolerating
or enforcing such institutions and the supporting evidence. Even
statements about majorities doing anything of this kind in a certain
community should not be confused with representing a communities
institutions. I think the text should reflect that.
I think the text should be more clear about the sense of "fact" used,
and the modelling work should clearly differentiate particulars "I am
married", "getting married" from the institution of "marriage" and a
particular definition of "marriage" instituted. I believe that thinking
of any of them being out of space or/and time and detached from the
individuals supporting it will create a completely different sense for
the link to evidence, basically not comparable. I'd also like to refer
to Kant's opinion about the role of space and time in cognition.
I think since evidence in social sciences is much debated and normally
statistically justified, well known criticism in the application and
validity of statistical reasoning should be taken into account by some
form of differentiated position.
Finally, if using conceptual "standards" from particular disciplinary
schools, even from a whole discipline, is intended, I'd expect serious
considerations about the cultural bias this introduces.
All the best,
Martin
On Thu., Feb. 3, 2022, 11:52 p.m. Martin Doerr via Crm-sig,
<crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote:
On 2/2/2022 10:36 PM, Francesco Beretta via Crm-sig wrote:
Dear Martin,
Thank you for your message and comments.
The sentence in question is not the happiest, and George and
myself were not totally satisfied with the wording but it was
necessary to send the homework to the SIG. We can of course
reword it and a refomulation that is certainly also not the best
one but expresses the same sense could be:
" For facts which are established by convention as opposed to
facts observed in an objective manner
sure, should be something like the material process characterizing
the events,
Take an exemple. I organize a garden party and all my friends and
guests are happy. But there’s a major difference if I do this
privately in 2019 or if I’m a prime minister and there’s a COVID
pandemic and I just imposed restrictive measures on the whole
population of my country. The [objective / spatio-temporal]
observed fact is the same, a crm:E5 garden party, but the social
‘facts’ arount it —my social function, the law establishing that
garden parties are not allowed, etc. etc.— add a social overlay
to the event which —for humans living in society— changes
everything and has totally different consequences. CRMbase is
concerned with objective spatio-temporal facts (from E4 Period
downward this is the substance of facts : “This class comprises
sets of coherent phenomena or cultural manifestations occurring
*in time **and space*.”)
On the other hand, social facts are situated in another space
that could be called the intentional-temporal, that is to say,
the space of phenomena specific to human societies observed
through the filter of their conventions or collective
representations. There is no opposition but a perfect
articulation because the social is grafted onto the
spatio-temporal (or the physical and biological) but adding an
overlay that allows different groups of humans to interpret the
same ‘objective’ fact as being two quite different situations: a
totally normal and a big problem.
But I propose to discuss all this, as you proposed earlier, in
person at a live, even if digital, meeting.
Best
Francesco
Le 02.02.22 à 20:11, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig a écrit :
Dear Francesco,
I find this text very well written and clear. My only question
is, why:
" For facts which are established by convention as opposed to
pure spatio-temporal facts,"
I do not see ground in the CRMbase, and the methodology applied,
to regard that facts which are described in the CRM are "pure
spatio-temporal", even if some of the classes and properties
applied may describe only a spatiotemporal confinement. The CRM
is very clear that the substance of Temporal Entities is not
space-time.
Further, respective facts you describe would be based on human
activities, and E7 is defined explicitly as being intentional in
substance.
Finally, and most important, there seems to be a
misunderstanding of CRM descriptions in general: no
classification and properties of the CRM are exhaustive or
"pure" in any sense. This is also the major idea behind multiple
instantiation, and open world. Describing an item in terms of
CRM does not make any statement what else it is not, except for
a few definitely disjoint classes.
Since this is a key concept of the CRM, part of the principles,
it should be discussed. To my understanding, no extension can be
characterized as "opposed to" another, it would violate its
logical foundations.
All the best,
Martin
On 2/1/2022 2:13 PM, Francesco Beretta via Crm-sig wrote:
Dear all,
Please find in attachment the homework of George Bruseker and
myself concerning "Issue 580: CRMsoc redefinition of scope" for
presentation at the next SIG.
All the best,
Francesco
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
