UNIT – II Ontology

1. Ontological categories
2. Philosophical background
3. Top-level categories
4. Describing physical entities
5. Defining abstractions
6. Sets
7. Collections
8. Types and Categories
9. Space and Time

2.1 Ontological Categories

Ontology and Its Role:
 Ontology is the study of existence and the types of entities (both abstract and concrete) that
make up the world.
 Ontology helps define what exists and categorizes the types of things in the world.
 In logic and knowledge representation, ontology helps us define predicates (which describe
properties of things) and labels (which categorize entities).
Sources of Ontological Categories:
 Observation: Knowledge about the physical world is gathered through observation.
 Reasoning: Reasoning takes this knowledge and creates a framework of abstractions (called
metaphysics) to understand how these observations fit together and how they relate to each
other.
Ontological Categories in Computer Systems:
 The choice of ontological categories is the first step in designing any system that organizes
knowledge, like:
o Databases: Where categories are called domains.
o AI: Where categories are referred to as types.
o Object-Oriented Systems: Where categories are known as classes.
o Logic: Where they are called types or sorts.
 Whatever they are called, the selection of categories determines everything that can be
represented in a computer application or an entire family of applications. (These categories
define the structure and the kinds of information that can be represented within a system)
 Ontological categories are essential for organizing and representing knowledge in computer
systems, databases, AI, and logic.

Impact of Choosing Categories:

  The selection of ontological categories determines what can be represented in a system or
application.
 If the categories chosen are incomplete, distorted, or restrictive, they will limit the generality
and flexibility of the entire system, including databases, applications, or programs.
 Choosing the right categories in system design ensures flexibility, completeness, and
correctness in representing real-world knowledge.

QUINE's CRITERION.
Fundamental Question of Ontology:
 Quine's central question: The philosopher Willard Van Orman Quine observed that the
fundamental question of ontology can be expressed in three words: "What is there?"
 His answer: "Everything." However, this answer is too broad and lacks detail. To refine this,
we need a more specific criterion for determining what exists.
Quine’s Famous Slogan:
 Quine proposed: "To be is to be the value of a quantified variable."

Microworlds
What Are Microworlds?
 Microworlds are small, simplified ontologies (or frameworks of knowledge) used for very
specific applications. They contain just a few concepts that are tailored to solve a particular
problem.
Difference Between Philosophical Ontologies and Microworlds:
 Philosophers usually build large, general ontologies from the top down. They try to define
everything that exists in the world.
 Programmers, on the other hand, start with a smaller, focused ontology (a microworld). This
makes it easier to solve a specific problem because the system only needs to understand a small
set of concepts.

Example of a Microworld:
 The Chat-80 System: This was a system used to answer questions about geographical
concepts. Its ontology had a few categories like mountains, rivers, airstrips, and towns. It
was designed to work with these simplified categories for a question-answering system.
CYC CATEGORIES:
Cyc System Overview:
 Cyc is an AI project aimed at capturing all human knowledge. The name comes from the
stressed syllable in the word "encyclopedia."
 It has been developed with the goal of creating a knowledge base that can represent complex
relationships and concepts across all domains of human understanding.
 CYC organizes knowledge into categories (or types), which include things like objects,
processes, and properties.
 CYC a conceptual framework for organizing ontological categories, specifically related to
objects, their attributes, relationships, and types
 Cyc aims to represent all human knowledge by organizing concepts into a structured
hierarchy, starting from general categories like Thing and refining them into specialized types.
Cyc Hierarchy and Categories:
 At the top of the Cyc hierarchy are general categories like Thing. These are extremely broad
categories that can be further divided into more specific types.
 Thing (the most general category) doesn't have any properties itself. It’s a placeholder for
everything that exists.
 The hierarchy starts with general concepts and gradually moves toward more specialized
categories. For example:
o Thing divides into IndividualObject, Intangible, and RepresentedThing.
o RepresentedThing is essentially the complement of InternalMachineThing (things
internal to the machine running Cyc).
o Intangible could include concepts like thoughts or ideas, while IndividualObject
could include physical things like people or objects.

Tangible and Intangible Objects:

 Tangible objects are physical and can be touched (e.g., a book, a chair).
 Intangible objects are non-physical entities that cannot be touched (e.g., concepts, ideas,
information).
Composite Objects:
 Some objects are composite: a combination of tangible and intangible parts. For instance:
o George Bush could be classified as a composite of a tangible object (his body) and
an intangible object (his mind).
Cyc's Evolution and Current Stage:
 Cyc has grown from a small ontology of a few categories to over 100,000 concept types, along
with millions of facts and axioms.
 Although the early versions, like the one shown in Figure 2.2, are no longer the current
representation, they still show the early philosophical and computational challenges faced
by the project.
  The system continues to evolve, and it now reflects on its own representations using
metalevels and contexts.

Philosophical Background
Key Takeaways:
 Heraclitus said everything is constantly changing, but there is an underlying logos or reason
that governs the changes.
 St. John took the concept of logos to a religious level, suggesting it was divine.
 Lao-Tzu and other Eastern philosophers also talked about a universal force (Tao) that governs
everything, similar to the logos.
 Plato developed these ideas further by distinguishing between the changing physical world and
the unchanging world of ideas (forms), where true reality resides.
Heraclitus and the Idea of Change:
 Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher from the 6th century BC, famously said that "everything flows"
or "panta rhei," meaning that everything is always changing. His famous saying was, "One
cannot step twice into the same river." This means that things are always in a state of flux, and
nothing stays the same.
 Heraclitus also introduced the idea of the logos, which is a fundamental principle or reason that
governs the universe. Logos can be translated as word, speech, reason, or even computation.
It refers to an underlying order or structure that shapes the constant change of the world. So,
even though everything changes, there is a reason or law that controls and explains that change.
Heraclitus vs. St. John the Evangelist:
 Later, St. John the Evangelist in the Bible also used the word logos, but in a religious context.
He said, "In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and God was the
logos." This means that the logos is not just a law of nature but something divine. Everything
in the universe came into being through the logos, and nothing exists without it.
  Heraclitus and St. John both used the same word logos but had different interpretations of it—
one from a philosophical, the other from a religious perspective.
The East and West Connection:
 Interestingly, Heraclitus' ideas about the logos (the underlying principle) are similar to the
teachings of ancient thinkers from India (Gautama Buddha) and China. For example, Lao-
Tzu, a Chinese philosopher, spoke about the Tao (often translated as the Way), which also
describes a universal principle or force that governs the universe, much like the logos.
 Lao-Tzu’s Tao Te Ching starts with the idea: "The Tao gave birth to the One; The One gave
birth to the Two; The Two gave birth to the Three; And the Three gave birth to the ten
thousand things." This describes the way everything in the universe comes into existence
through a single, unchanging principle, similar to the logos
Plato and Mathematical Forms:
 Plato, another important philosopher, built on Heraclitus' ideas. Plato distinguished between the
physical world, which is always changing (just like the river), and the intangible world of
ideas, which is eternal and unchanging. Plato called these unchanging ideas or forms the true
reality, and he believed they were the basis for understanding everything in the physical world.
 For Plato, the world of mathematical forms (like numbers and geometric shapes) is the real,
permanent world, and the physical world is just a reflection of it.
Aristotle’s Categories
Aristotle’s View on Reality:
 Plato believed that the intangible world of ideas was the true reality, and the physical world
was just a reflection of these ideas.
 Aristotle, however, disagreed. He believed that the physical world we experience with our
senses is the ultimate reality, and the abstract forms (Plato's ideas) are just concepts we
develop from our experiences of the world around us.
Aristotle's Categories:
 Aristotle wanted to classify and understand everything that can be said or predicated about the
world. He created 10 basic categories for this purpose. These categories are ways of grouping
everything that exists or can be described. Here’s what they are:
1. Substance (ousia): What something is (e.g., a person, a tree, a chair).
2. Quality (poion): Describes what something is like (e.g., color, texture, shape).
3. Quantity (poson): How much or how many of something there is (e.g., size, number).
4. Relation (pros ti): How something relates to something else (e.g., father-child, teacher-
student).
5. Activity (poiein): Describes actions or what something does (e.g., running, thinking).
6. Passivity (paschein): What happens to something (e.g., being hurt, being taught).
7. Having (echein): What something possesses (e.g., a book has pages, a person has a
job).
8. Situatedness (keisthat): Where something is (e.g., "on the table," "in the room").
 9. Spatiality (pou): Where something is located in space (e.g., in the sky, on the floor).
10. Temporality (pote): When something occurs (e.g., yesterday, in the future).
Porphyry’s Tree:
 Porphyry, a philosopher, tried to organize Aristotle’s categories into a hierarchical tree (a
way of arranging ideas that shows relationships between them). In his tree, Substance is at the
top, and everything else (like quality, quantity, etc.) is grouped under it as different types of
things related to it.

Brentano’s More Detailed Tree:

 Later, the philosopher Franz Brentano took Aristotle’s categories and organized them in a
more systematic way. His version showed that there are different branches under the main
categories like Substance and Accident (something that happens to a substance, like a property
or feature).
Challenges with Translating Aristotle's Terms:
 Aristotle used Greek terms, and because Greek has special rules, any phrase can become a
noun just by adding the definite article ("the"). This makes translation into other languages like
English tricky. Some translations, like "situatedness" or "containment," might sound strange
because they're not always directly translatable.
 Despite these translation challenges, the core ideas Aristotle discovered about how to classify
and understand the world are still incredibly important and relevant today.

Why It Matters:
  Aristotle's categories are fundamental for understanding how we classify everything in the
world. These categories are still important in fields like philosophy, logic, linguistics, and even
computer science.
 Understanding these categories helps in knowledge representation systems—systems that
categorize and manage information (like how we represent data in databases or artificial
intelligence). By organizing the world into categories like Aristotle did, we can better represent
and understand complex information.
Key Takeaways :
 Aristotle classified everything in the world into 10 categories to understand and organize
knowledge.
 These categories can be grouped into different types of things: what things are, how they
behave, what properties they have, where and when they exist, etc.
 Porphyry and Brentano further organized Aristotle’s ideas into more structured systems.
 Even though Aristotle’s terms can be hard to translate, his ideas about categorizing the world
are essential in many areas of study, especially in philosophy, logic, and knowledge systems.

Kant’s Categories
Immanuel Kant’s Challenge to Aristotle:
 In his work Critique of Pure Reason (1787), Immanuel Kant presented a major challenge to
Aristotle’s categories.

 Kant’s categories are different from Aristotle’s because they focus on how we organize
knowledge through the mind, not just on the external world.

 Kant’s categories help us structure our experience and understanding of the world in terms
of things like quantity, quality, relation, and modality (possibility, necessity).

 While Aristotle classified everything based on what exists and how it can be described, Kant
approached the problem from a different angle. Kant focused on how we understand and
organize knowledge through the mind's structure. Kant believed that our understanding of the
world is shaped by innate categories that the mind uses to process everything we perceive.
The Four Groups of Kant’s Categories: Kant organized his categories into four main groups, each
with three sub-categories. These are:
 Quantity (related to numbers or how many):
1. Unity: Refers to one thing or a singular concept.
2. Plurality: Refers to multiple things or a group.
3. Totality: Refers to the whole of something, all parts together.
 Quality (related to the nature of something):
1. Reality: Refers to something that exists or is real.
2. Negation: Refers to the absence or non-existence of something.
3. Limitation: Refers to the boundaries or restrictions of something.
  Relation (related to how things connect):
1. Inherence: Describes how one thing is a property of another (like how color is a
property of an object).
2. Causality: Describes cause-and-effect relationships (e.g., fire causes heat).
3. Community: Refers to the connection between things that act together (for example,
how social groups interact).
 Modality (related to possibility and necessity):
1. Possibility: Refers to what could happen.
2. Existence: Refers to what actually exists.
3. Necessity: Refers to what must happen, the inevitable.
Kant also suggested that once the main categories were identified, it would be easy to add more specific
subcategories. For example, force, activity, and passivity could fit under the category of causality
(cause and effect).
TRIADS.
Kant’s Triadic Structure:
 In Kant's categorical system, he used a triadic structure for organizing his concepts, where
each group of three categories has a primary concept, a secondary concept, and a third
concept that is a combination of the first two.

 Kant and later philosophers used a three-part structure (triad) for organizing concepts, where
the third concept is a combination of the first two, requiring a special mental act.

 For example, in the Quantity group, the categories are:

o Unity (the concept of one),
o Plurality (the concept of many),
o Totality (the concept of the whole, which is a combination of unity and plurality).
The Concept of “Act of Understanding”:
 Kant suggested that the third concept in each triad is not just a derivative of the first two
categories but is also created by a special act of the understanding. This means that the third
concept doesn’t just follow from the first two; it requires a distinct mental effort to combine
them.

 Combining Concepts: There is debate about how the first two categories combine to form
the third. Philosophers sought a deeper explanation for why the triads work in this way, similar
to how molecules combine in chemistry.

 The question then arises: Is this act of combining the categories the same for every triad, or
does each triad involve a unique act of understanding? If they are all different, the triadic pattern
might not be as uniform as it seems.
The Search for a Deeper Explanation:
  After Kant, German philosophers searched for a deeper explanation for the triadic structure.
Some used the terms thesis, antithesis, and synthesis to describe how the first category (thesis)
and the second category (antithesis) combine to form the third (synthesis).
 These terms sound impressive, but they don’t explain how or why the categories combine in
the way they do. Kant’s term Verbindung (which means connection or combination) is
similarly vague.
Chemical Analogy:
 The idea of combining concepts can be compared to chemistry. In chemistry, molecules
combine in specific ways to form new substances. The method of combination is determined
by the internal structure of the molecules.
 Similarly, Kant believed that there should be a theory of categories that explains how the
internal structure of concepts determines how they combine. However, this explanation is still
not fully developed.
Hegel’s Contribution:
 Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel expanded on Kant’s triadic idea in his work The Science of
Logic (1831). Hegel used the term aufheben to describe the process of combining the first two
categories into a third.
o Aufheben literally means "to raise up," but it has a deeper meaning: it means to
preserve and also to cancel. It implies that when the third concept arises, it both
preserves the first two and transcends them, creating something new.
 Hegel's philosophy was very focused on contradictions. He believed that contradictions in
categories were productive, leading to the creation of new categories that resolve the old
contradictions.

 Hegel expanded the idea of triads with the term aufheben, meaning to preserve and
transcend. This showed how concepts evolve by resolving contradictions.

Challenges with Hegel’s Theory:

 Hegel’s idea of aufheben was even more ambiguous than Kant’s combination or synthesis,
and this caused difficulty in understanding how the triadic approach worked in practice.
 Despite its flaws, Hegel’s work on triads is still considered valuable because it explores how
categories can evolve and transform through contradictions.
Philosophers’ Criticisms:
 Some logicians, like Bertrand Russell, criticized Hegel’s work for its contradictions. He
joked that the worse your logic, the more interesting the consequences it leads to. This
critique highlights how Hegel's system, despite its logical inconsistencies, generated new
philosophical ideas.
Peirce’s Categories
Peirce’s Triadic System:
 Charles Sanders Peirce was inspired by Kant’s and Hegel’s triadic structures (three-part
categories) but developed his own system with three fundamental categories: Firstness,
Secondness, and Thirdness.
 Firstness: This category represents the concept of something existing independently on its
own, without any relation to anything else. It’s about qualities that define an entity by itself.
o Example: An object’s color or shape—these exist independently of anything else.
 Secondness: This category involves relationships or reactions between two things. It’s about
an entity’s existence in relation to something else.
o Example: The interaction between a person and their reflection in a mirror is a
secondness. The mirror reacts to the person.
 Thirdness: This category involves mediation—it’s the concept that brings two entities
together through some relationship. The third category connects the first and second.
o Example: The relationship between a parent and a child or a contract between two
people. It mediates and connects them.