[366]              home              [368]

 

Friday, January 27, 2006

 

 The BCNGroup Beadgames

 

 

Challenge Problem à

 

[148] ß [parallel discussion on generative methodology (Judith Rosen)

[147] ß [parallel discussion on generative methodology (Peter Krieg)

[368] ß [comment on four issues (Richard Ballard)

 

 

Four Issues about Ontological Modeling

 

Communication from Paul Werbos  à [367]

 

 

 

Communication from Paul Prueitt

 

Paul Werbos makes four important points, which I label as

 

Formal verse Natural reality:  It is crucial that one may use mathematical methods to understand a system which does not itself use or exhibit "deduction" -- whether one studies an electron or the brain of a mouse.

 

Plausible perfection of mathematics:  I do believe that the physical universe as a whole can be plausibly represented via formal mathematical models, to the best of our knowledge today, and that we are well advised to push such understanding further than we have yet.

 

Relational representation:  As for relational representations -- relational representations  EITHER at as a function of time, or across all space-time or all existence, certainly are among the  important tools. Like derivatives -- they are widely useful, but in many different ways, hard to summarize in a few minutes.

 

Issue of Autopoiesis:  I don't see relational structure AS SUCH as addressing "autopoiesis ," really, at a basic level.

 

Each of these points must be considered to be an open question of science.

 

Moreover, it is possible that the four points cover all of the issues that face the use of formal systems, whether by science or by society at large (as envisioned in the now popular notion of a “Semantic Web”.) 

 

So for our community, we need to ask if there are other questions, or if these might be modified some.  But many of us are willing to say that these are a most excellent and complete way to start a principled discussion about ontological modeling.