User:Phlsph7/Ontology - Related fields
Related fields
[edit]Ontology overlaps with many disciplines, including logic, the study of correct reasoning.[1] Ontologists often employ logical systems to express their insights, specifically in the field of formal ontology. Of particular interest to them is the existential quantifier (), which is used to express what exists. In first-order logic, for example, the formula states that dogs exist.[2] Some philosophers study ontology by examining the structure of thought and language, saying that they reflect the structure of being.[3] Doubts about the accuracy of natural language have led some ontologists to seek a new formal language, termed ontologese, for a better representation of the fundamental structure of reality.[4]
Suggested Upper Merged Ontology | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fundamental categories in the Suggested Upper Merged Ontology[5] |
Ontologies are often used in information science to provide a conceptual scheme or inventory of a specific domain, making it possible to classify objects and formally represent information about them.[6] This is of specific interest to computer science, which builds databases to store this information and defines computational processes to automatically transform and use it.[7] For instance, to encode and store information about academic activities, a college database may use an ontology with categories such as person, teacher, student, and exam.[8] In some cases, it is necessary to exchange information belonging to different domains or to integrate databases using distinct ontologies. This can be achieved with the help of upper ontologies, which are not limited to one specific domain. They use general categories that apply to most or all domains, like Suggested Upper Merged Ontology and Basic Formal Ontology.[9]
Similar applications of ontology are found in various fields seeking to manage extensive information within a structured framework. Protein Ontology is a formal framework for the standardized representation of protein-related entities and their relationships.[10] Gene Ontology and Sequence Ontology serve a similar purpose in the field of genetics.[11] Environment Ontology is a knowledge representation focused on ecosystems and environmental processes.[12] Friend of a Friend provides a conceptual framework to represent relations between people and their interests and activities.[13]
The topic of ontology has received increased attention in anthropology since the 1990s, sometimes termed the "ontological turn".[14] This type of inquiry is focused on how people from different cultures experience and understand the nature of being. Specific interest has been given to the ontological outlook of Indigenous people and how it differs from a Western perspective.[15] As an example of this contrast, it has been argued that various indigenous communities ascribe intentionality to non-human entities, like plants, forests, or rivers. This outlook is known as animism[16] and is also found in Native American ontologies, which emphasize the interconnectedness of all living entities and the importance of balance and harmony with nature.[17]
Ontology is closely related to theology and its interest in the existence of God as an ultimate entity. The ontological argument, first proposed by Anselm of Canterbury, attempts to prove the existence of the divine. It defines God as the greatest conceivable being. From this definition it concludes that God must exist since God would not be the greatest conceivable being if God lacked existence.[18] Another overlap in the two disciplines is found in ontological theories that use God or an ultimate being as the foundational principle of reality. Heidegger criticized this approach, terming it ontotheology.[19]
References
[edit]Notes
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ Hofweber 2023, Lead Section, § 2.1 Different conceptions of logic
- ^
- Cook 2009, p. 112–113
- Casati & Fujikawa, Lead Section, §1. Existence as a Second-Order Property and Its Relation to Quantification
- Albertazzi 1996, p. 206
- ^ Hofweber 2023, § 4.6 The form of thought and the structure of reality. (L4) meets (O3)
- ^
- Hofweber 2023, § 4.5 The fundamental language. (L1) meets (O4) and (the new beginning of?) (O2)
- Hofweber 2021, p. 89
- ^ Heckmann 2006, p. 42
- ^
- Goy & Magro 2014, pp. 7456–7457
- Hawley 2016, pp. 168–170
- ^
- Goy & Magro 2014, pp. 7456–7457
- Hawley 2016, pp. 168–169
- ^ Goy & Magro 2014, p. 7457
- ^ Gopalakrishnan Nair 2014, p. 4594
- ^
- Chicco & Masseroli 2018, pp. 832
- Masseroli 2018, pp. 814
- ^ Masseroli 2018, pp. 814
- ^ Pouchard, Devarakon & Bransetter 2015, pp. 37–38
- ^ Yu 2014, pp. 357–359
- ^ Scott 2013, p. 859–872
- ^
- Scott 2013, p. 859–872
- Heywood 2012, p. 143–151
- ^ Ludwig & Weiskopf 2019
- ^
- Pack 2023, p. 105–107, Animist Ontologies, Abstraction, and Slavery
- Pack 2022, p. 162–163
- Sinclair 2022, p. 96, Righting Names: The Importance of Native American Philosophies of Naming for Environmental Justice
- ^
- Grayling 2019, Anselm
- Dehsen 2013, p. 10
- ^
- Halteman 1998, Lead Section
- Thomson 2011, p. 114
Sources
[edit]- Gopalakrishnan Nair, T. R. (2014). "Intelligent Knowledge Systems". In Mehdi, Khosrow-Pour (ed.). Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Third Edition. IGI Global. ISBN 978-1-4666-5889-9. Archived from the original on 8 April 2024. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
- Hawley, Katherine (2016). "Applied Metaphysics". In Lippert-Rasmussen, Kasper; Brownlee, Kimberley; Coady, David (eds.). A Companion to Applied Philosophy. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-118-86911-6.
- Goy, Anna; Magro, Diego (2014). "What Are Ontologies Useful For?". In Mehdi, Khosrow-Pour (ed.). Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Third Edition. IGI Global. ISBN 978-1-4666-5889-9. Archived from the original on 8 April 2024. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
- Thomson, Ian (2011). "Ontotheology". In Dahlstrom, Daniel O. (ed.). Interpreting Heidegger: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-139-50042-5.
- Halteman, Matthew C. (1998). "Ontotheology". Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780415249126-K115-1. Retrieved 28 June 2024.
- Yu, Liyang (2014). A Developer’s Guide to the Semantic Web. Springer. ISBN 978-3-662-43796-4.
- Pouchard, Line; Devarakon, Ranjeet; Bransetter, Marcia (2015). "A Linked Science Investigation: Enhancing Climate Change Data Discovery with Ontologies and Semantic Technologies". In Narock, T.; Fox, P. (eds.). The Semantic Web in Earth and Space Science. Current Status and Future Directions. IOS Press. ISBN 978-1-61499-501-2.
- Masseroli, Marco (2018). "Biological and Medical Ontologies: Introduction". Encyclopedia of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology: ABC of Bioinformatics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-12-811432-2.
- Chicco, David; Masseroli, Marco (2018). "Biological and Medical Ontologies: Protein Ontology (PRO)". Encyclopedia of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology: ABC of Bioinformatics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-12-811432-2.
- Cook, Roy T. (2009). Dictionary of Philosophical Logic. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-3197-1. Archived from the original on 16 August 2023. Retrieved 1 September 2023.
- Casati, Filippo; Fujikawa, Naoya. "Existence". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. ISSN 2161-0002. Archived from the original on 10 August 2023. Retrieved 7 August 2023.
- Hofweber, Thomas (2021). "Why Our Natural Languages are Ideal Languages for Metaphysics". In Miller, J. T. M. (ed.). The Language of Ontology. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-264853-2.
- Heywood, Paolo (2012). "Anthropology and What There Is: Reflections on 'Ontology'". The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology. 30 (1): 143–151. doi:10.3167/ca.2012.300112. ISSN 0305-7674. JSTOR 43610895.
- Ludwig, David; Weiskopf, Daniel A. (September 2019). "Ethnoontology: Ways of world-building across cultures". Philosophy Compass. 14 (9). doi:10.1111/phc3.12621. S2CID 199516840.
Consider the animism debate. Animists consider nonhuman entities (e.g., plants, forests, or rivers) as intentional actors (Harvey, 2005). There is substantial evidence that animism is a widespread metaphysical view. For example, the Nayaka people of South India consider not only certain animals but also stones, hills, cups, and knives to be devaru: beings that stand in active, quasi-social relationships with them (Bird-David, 1999). Devaru are aspects of a larger kin structure that incorporates potential "partners" in the nonhuman world. In addition to these ethnographic observations, there are intriguing cross-cultural similarities in animist ontologies. Indigenous communities around the world tend to be much more permissive in their ascription of intentionality than Western participants (Ojalehto, Douglas, & García, 2017).
- Pack, Justin (2022). Environmental Philosophy in Desperate Times. Broadview Press. pp. 162–163. ISBN 978-1-77048-866-3.
- Pack, Justin (2023). "Animist Ontologies, Abstraction, and Slavery". Money and Thoughtlessness: A Genealogy and Defense of the Traditional Suspicions of Money and Merchants. Springer Nature. pp. 105–107. ISBN 978-3-031-22261-0.
- Scott, Michael W. (2013). "The anthropology of ontology (religious science?)". The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 19 (4): 859–872. doi:10.1111/1467-9655.12067. JSTOR 42001687.
Since roughly the 1990s, a growing number of anthropologists have become interested in the study of ontology – the investigation and theorization of diverse experiences and understandings of the nature of being itself. This generally takes the form of ethnographic accounts of indigenous non-Western modes and models of being, presented in more or less explicit contrast with aspects of a Euro-American or modern ontology imputed to conventional anthropology.
- Sinclair, Rebekah (11 March 2022). "Righting Names: The Importance of Native American Philosophies of Naming for Environmental Justice". In Dhillon, Jaskiran (ed.). Indigenous Resurgence: Decolonialization and Movements for Environmental Justice. Berghahn Books. p. 96. ISBN 978-1-80073-247-6.