[om-list] Re: Project direction

[Mark Butler]

Lee,

Clearly we are not going to model the conceptions of every person who every
lived.  I envision a small number of formal namespaces for the concepts that
various knowledge modelers can explicitly agree on the identity of. Any other
name would be just in an informal context like all the words in the English
language.

As far as your concerns go, I can assure you that no one seriously thinks that
a system such as ours is going to independently discover new truths.  If you
are skeptical about our references to the AI field, I can agree with you that
"artifical intelligence" is nearly an oxymoron.  However, as long as its
limitations are correctly accounted for, much of "AI" technology can be very
useful for a wide variety of tasks, such as approximate natural language
translation.  

But clearly, automated "reasoning" is not our main priority, rather it is
knowledge representation.  The ability to chain inferences together is just a
side effect of being able to model statements in one or more semi-formal
logical systems.  A very large part of human knowledge is in the form of rules
of thumb, rough approximations, mathematical formulas, social conventions, and
so on that cannot be simply described as the properties of objects, but rather
require being represented as complex logical statements about causality,
preference, and utility. 

If you have read the article I have been referring to, I believe that what we
are doing is most useful as a medium for coordinated human expression of what
we know about the world, not for magically making new fundamental discoveries.
If a system can suggest probable hypotheses based on rule based pattern
matching and other forms of inexact reasoning (aka educated guessing), that is
just a bonus.

Keep in mind that we are modeling human knowledge and belief, not necessarily
"the Truth" per se.  The degree to which various aspects of human knowledge
correspond to absolute truth is an individual exercise requiring judgement and
inspiration.  As non-Revelators all we can do is collect informed
suggestions.  It is to duly called Prophets to publicly declare new truths
about matters that we mere mortals know nearly nothing about.

 - Mark


Lee Howard wrote:
> 
> >    So, in a sense, namespace is part of the [unabbreviated] name.  I guess
> >this could work.  But I envision an awful lot of namespaces, because, going
> >back to my example "God": how many conceptions of god are there?  A lower
> >bound would be the number of sects, religions and mythologies which have
> >ever existed.  An upper bound would be the number of people who have ever
> >lived (and maybe even including some which have not lived, if we count the
> >opinion of spirits, if any have been recorded in scripture, for example).
> 
> Once again, I am quite confused as to the direction of this project... and
> if I were to try to explain what I had *thought* that the project was after
> and then try to explain how this differs from that... well, I'd be
> lambasted on all sides between various insults to my intelligence.
> 
> So, I'll let it suffice to say that I am confused - again.  If this means
> that I am stupid, unobservant, silly, or destructive... well, then whatever
> - just don't bother telling me so.
> 
> Lee.
>