Daniel,
nice observations and thanks for the references - I had intended to
circulate the first one as well, at some point. For my part, I think
ontology will become useful in information modelling precisely for the
reason that it offers ways of representing distinctions between real
world referents and the things that refer to them (information
entities). In other words, to help the IT sector understand 'how to
model'. Historically it has been completely confused (I would go so far
as to say not even conscious) of the difference between real world
entities and events and the information items that document them.
With no understanding of the in-principle divide between ontological and
epistemological points of view (or equivalently of Popper's 3 worlds),
information modelling can't possibly achieve much clarity or computability.
So in agreeing with you, I would add that ontology-thinking is not a
recipe for how to do information modelling, but it is useful for
understanding what not to express in information models -
mind-independent truths.
- thomas
On 08/09/2015 01:23, Daniel Karlsson wrote:
Dear All,
agree partly with Ian's assessment, i.e. about the messiness. While I
much appreciate what I have read, and I've had much help from earlier
texts from the authors (as I'm sure I will from this book), there is
in the medical informatics community a widespread belief that the
position held by (some part of) the BFO community is undisputed and
sort-of final. There are still issues which requires careful
consideration, especially regarding information artefacts and the
is-about relationship [1, 2], but also about e.g. dispositions [3],
and functions [4].
Additionally, while ontologies deal with what is universally true, it
is my belief that universal truth takes, and should take, the back
seat compared to user needs and practicality in information modelling.
First-world (using Popper's ontology [5]) ontologies are outcomes of
our understanding of the physical world and evolve as science evolves
(at least good ones). Information models and other second-third-world
ontologies are always constructs and, like with fictional characters,
nothing can be discovered by examining those models in addition to
what has been explicitly stated. For this reason, ontology as a method
isn't as helpful for information modellers as it is for others.
1.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266021648_An_Ontological_Analysis_of_Reference_in_Health_Record_Statements
2. http://www.amazon.com/Aboutness-Carl-G-Hempel-Lecture/dp/0691144958
3. http://www.amazon.com/Dispositions-Stephen-Mumford/dp/0199259828
4.
http://www.amazon.com/Functions-Biological-Artificial-Worlds-Philosophical/dp/026211321X
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popper%27s_three_worlds
/Daniel
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
