Sorry Micru, I read your document, but I can't see a relation beetween ethanol, negenthropy, and Wikidata's survival :)
2014-10-05 22:48 GMT+02:00 David Cuenca <dacu...@gmail.com>: > Hi Eric, > > The idea is to separate in those edge cases the perceptual model (what is > recognized) from the name given to it. As such you can consider "ethanol" > and "chemical compound" metaclasses (names) pointing to a label-less class > that represents the model. > > In practical terms what it would entail is: > - remove the labels from Q153 > - create one item for the label "ethanol" and one item for the label > "chemical compound" > - link Q153 with those names using "has name" > - "ethanol" is no longer an instance, but a class that can take different > names, "ethanol" being more specific > > Do you realize that after this "scrap everything and start again from the > beginning" the resulting structure is more comprehensive and encompasses > previous efforts? "Entity" stays as it is, but now it can be examined by > its qualities and they can be taken apart if needed. The term "cognizable" > is 1:1 compatible with the subclass/instance model, but it emphasizes the > necessity of having an observer for it to be meaningful. Classes do not > exist in isolation, it is in fact very naive to keep the notion of > objectivity when dealing with observation. Even logic needs a system to be > executed, and based on which reality models? How were they produced? And > how are those models and the models based on them verified? The problem > with logicians is that they think themselves isolated from the world, > however even they were born from a womb. > > And have you seen who introduced the term "negentropy"? If you check the > names behind it you will see that those ideas are in fact standing on the > shoulders of giants. It is hard to model life without understanding first > that life itself is survival-oriented. > > Those papers are interesting but fail to address basic questions like: who > decides identity? How does the observer interact with it? Where does > information come from? And without tackling those questions, and by > extension, emergent processes, logic seems like a deux ex machina that > appears from nothingness and acts in nothingness. > > Best, > Micru > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Emw <emw.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi David, >> >> How does your treatise relate to the fact that >> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q153 has statements that entail the >> following? [1] >> >> ethanol >> *instance of* chemical compound >> *subclass of* chemical compound >> >> How would it resolve that specific problem? >> >> Such statements make Wikidata incompatible with ChEBI and other major >> ontologies, like Gene Ontology and Disease Ontology, which use *instance >> of* (i.e. rdf:type, P31) and *subclass of* (i.e. rdfs:subClassOf, P279, >> is_a) as recommended in the Relation Ontology (RO) [2] and the Basic Formal >> Ontology (BFO). >> >> For Wikidata to be interoperable with other major ontologies in the >> Semantic Web, we cannot "scrap everything and start again from the >> beginning". We must stand on the shoulders of giants. Doing away with >> "entity" [3] as a the top of the *subclass of* hierarchy and introducing >> a raft of idiosyncratic ontological constructs like "identifiables", >> "cognizables", "negentropy" and "system survival-oriented direction" to >> Wikidata is probably not the way to go. >> >> Regarding your concerns about the ability of existing approaches to >> represent emergent properties and natural language, I recommend perusing >> [4], an influential paper that informs DOLCE and BFO -- particularly the >> section on "The Role of Identity Criteria". I also highly recommend >> lectures 3 and 1 in >> http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/IntroOntology_Course.html for gaining >> a perspective on how BFO maintainers think about things like distinguishing >> objects and representations, and that upper ontology's philosophical >> roots. Given your interest in phenomenology and Husserl, you may also be >> interested in what BFO maintainers have written on those subjects in e.g. >> [5] with regard to ontology. >> >> Best, >> Eric >> >> [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q153 currently states "ethanol *subclass >> of* alcohol", but given "alcohol *subclass of* organic compound" and >> "organic compound *subclass of* chemical compound", it is entailed that >> "ethanol *subclass of* chemical compound". >> [2] Barry Smith et al. (2005). *Relations in Biomedical Ontologies*. >> http://genomebiology.com/2005/6/5/r46 >> [3] "Entity" item on Wikidata. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q35120. >> Mapped to owl:Thing. >> [4] Nicola Guarino (1998). *Some Ontological Principles for Designing >> Upper Level Lexical Resources*. http://arxiv.org/pdf/cmp-lg/9809002v1 >> [5] Barry Smith (1989). *Husserl: Logic and Formal Ontology*. >> http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/articles/lfo.html >> > > > > -- > Etiamsi omnes, ego non > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata-l mailing list > Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
