And what about the "notion behind the word"? How can there be a notion (I assume that's an image shaped by word association) without words? WC
--- On Fri, 7/25/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: "An 'aesthetic experience' MAKES the work 'art'" > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] > Date: Friday, July 25, 2008, 8:54 PM > In a message dated 7/25/08 11:31:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > writes: > > > > The following description you provide of your notion > behind the word > > 'ontology' is basically defective because it > assumes as "given" many of the > > very > > elements that someone like me would reject: > > > > "An ontology is-the formal representations > within a domain and the > > relationships within the domain. I would suggest that > cheerskep is > > insisting > > on > > defining the individuals of the domain > > before the domain itself has been tentatively > defined." > > > > Feh! Feh, I tell you! > > > > Which elements are they-and in this case, define element > please. > KAte Sullivan > > > ************** > Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign > up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. > > (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
