Abstract

Applied ontology, at the foundational level, is as much philosophy as engineering and as such provides a different aspect of contemporary natural philosophy. A prominent foundational ontology in this field is the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO). It is important for lesser known ontologies, like the trope ontology of interest here, to match to BFO because BFO acts like the glue between many disparate ontologies. Moreover, such matchings provide philosophical insight into ontologies. As such, the core research question here is how we can match a trope ontology to BFO (which is based on universals) and what insights such a matching provides for foundational ontology. This article provides a logical matching, starting with BFO’s top entities (continuants and occurrences) and identifies key ontological issues that arise, such as whether universals and mereological sums are equivalent. This article concludes with general observations about the matching, including that matching to universals is generally straightforward, but not so much the matching between relations. In particular, the treatment of occurrences as causal chains is different in the trope ontology, compared to BFO’s use of time arguments.

Highlights

  • The field of applied ontology came to prominence in the 1990s [1,2], driven by knowledge engineering issues

  • In previous work on the ontology of competitive intelligence [11], I developed a core ontology based on particularized relations, or tropes, which are fundamentally different from the universals that Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) is based on

  • The trope ontology is oriented towards building up an ontology from individual cases, rather than focusing on universals

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The field of applied ontology came to prominence in the 1990s [1,2], driven by knowledge engineering issues. In previous work on the ontology of competitive intelligence [11], I developed a core ontology based on particularized relations, or tropes, which are fundamentally different from the universals that BFO is based on (discussed in detail below). It is beyond the scope of this article to review the arguments for and against tropes (of which there are many flavors), suffice it to say that tropes are prominent in ontological theory that addresses the nature and quantity of properties I will provide some general observations about the results of the matching and the relationship between the two ontologies

The Trope Ontology
From Tropes to Universals
Accounting for Continuants and Occurrents
Other Universals
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call