[HN Gopher] Ontology Is Overrated - Categories, Links, and Tags ...
___________________________________________________________________
Ontology Is Overrated - Categories, Links, and Tags (2005)
Author : Tomte
Score : 6 points
Date : 2025-03-09 19:46 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (web.archive.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (web.archive.org)
| jmugan wrote:
| I've finally come around to this way of thinking for two reasons.
| 1. Our concepts seem to overlap too much to ever explicitly lay
| them all out like a periodic table. 2. Our concepts seem to be
| too situationally dependent to ever be defined in a concrete way.
| MPSimmons wrote:
| I work with someone who is obsessed with ontology, and it can be
| exhausting to discuss naming schemes, categories, etc at length.
| I do think there is a place for it, and having also lived in
| worlds where there was no appreciable consideration for how
| things are named and categorized and organized, I appreciate that
| he cares as much as he does.
|
| I mostly rubber duck and let him build castles in the sky which
| we'll probably never reach, or which will be overcome by events,
| but it's not the worst way for someone to spend their time. I'm
| not sure it's always productive, but I don't think it's harmful.
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| Explicit ontology construction is overused and implicit ontology
| construction is under-recognized.
|
| What made ontology click for me was that OOP is explicit ontology
| construction. Carving the world into similar types of things so
| we can use words to talk about referants is implicit ontology
| construction. The linguistic world is not isomorphic to the
| physical world but it has enough utility that we find it useful
| to confuse the map and territory.
|
| This confusion is one of the greatest sources of human conflict.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-09 22:01 UTC)