Re: [topicmaps-comment] Notions have existence .....

["Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com>]

[David Dodds]


> In my conceptualization system notions/ideas/concepts occur "within" a
> mental-agency, a "mind". Notions are the content of the mind process.
> Notions themselves cannot exist other than in a mind/mental agency.
>
> Transformations/"conveyances"/re-presentations !  of notions can
> "externalize" a rendition of such notion(s) but the notion(s) themselvs
> cannot be 'beamed out' in their completeness like mental telepathy.
>
> Certainly it makes sense to say that physical things exist independently
of
> human mind / perception / cognition but they are physical things not
> insubstantial / noncorporeal mentalisations/thoughts.
>
> Thomas, would you please discuss what it is that you perceive is gained by
> having a universe where concepts/ideas/noncorporea can exist outside of a
> mental agency/mind? To me this idea is reminescent of Pantheism, or a kind
> of mentwal phlogiston or ether. I dont understand what notions outside of
> minds could be used for.
>
David, you're not trying to suck me in here, are you?  Actually, I
personally tend to think that there are no concepts or categories that are
somehow inherent in the universe outside of complex structures like minds or
(perhaps) computer programs.  But the idea of Platonic ideas having an
independent existence has a long and honorable history, going back to, well,
Plato at least.  Shadows on the cave wall and all that.

Also, Steve N and Michel, in their talk on topic maps at the Semantic Web
Workshop, talked about concepts as being Platonic in nature,  and Steve's
post a day or so ago talked about topic subjects as needing to be unchanging
and permanent.  That's how this part of the thread got going.

As for what notions outside the mind could be used for, you could imagine
getting closer and closer to understanding the true and correct nature of
some ideal concept - presumably that would be useful if the world were
really structured that way.  In the context of topic maps, it would be nice
to think that we could actually establish in a stable way what our topics
represent, don't you think?

But as I say, I'm not so sure about all that but I'm not going to worry
about it either.

Cheers,

Tom P