XPost: sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: janburse@fastmail.fm   
      
   Hi,   
      
   I was refering to the assumptions that FOL   
   is the door opener for reasoning with information:   
      
   > The problem with claims such as " Formal languages,   
   > such as KAOS, are based on predicate logic and   
   > capture additional details about an application   
   > in a precise manner. They also provide a foundation   
   > for reasoning with information models." is that   
   > every thing in the quoted sentence is wrong.   
      
   I don't know, there are a lot of half century old   
   discoveries now in front of me. Where subtle things,   
   away from FOL, like recently Operational Sets by   
      
   Feferman have an appearance in my Prolog system.   
   What could be also interesting is Church-Frege   
   Ontology. It was later formalized in a book by   
      
   Melvin Fitting. You find it here:   
      
   Fitting, M. (2002). Types, Tableaus, and   
   Gödel’s God, Dordrecht: Kluwer.   
   https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-94-010-0411-4   
      
   I am not yet 100% sure, it could be that I have   
   also a use case, or many use cases for some   
   of the distinctions made, it seems the FOL model,   
      
   especially the FOL= model, i.e. FOL with equality,   
   is much much too simplified for practical uses.   
   I don't know whether these problems have already   
      
   a final settlement. A great deal of Proof Assistant   
   development in recent years only circled around   
   subletities of equality. Most prominent incursion   
      
   was 2009 with Vladimir Voevodsky, also NY.   
      
   Bye   
      
   Mild Shock schrieb:   
   > Hi,   
   >   
   > Its a little sad story with NY.   
   > Since the East Coast Logic was not   
   > only Chicago, you found in NY   
   >   
   > people dead and still alive:   
   > - Raymond Smullyan   
   > - Melvin Fitting   
   > - Who else?   
   >   
   > Some of them were even Prologers.   
   >   
   > Bye   
   >   
   > Mild Shock schrieb:   
   >> Hi,   
   >>   
   >> Although you could believe you are in the   
   >> possesion of Cartesian Thinking, you still   
   >> dont know whether NY is the next Detroit in 2035.   
   >>   
   >> Let me explain what mostlikely will happen:   
   >>   
   >> - Its for long no sea-line immigration hub anymore   
   >> - The millionairs don't need financial district proximity   
   >>    anymore, everything is done online anyways.   
   >> - The meat grinder of white colour jobs disappears,   
   >>    everything is done by artificial intelligence anyways.   
   >> - The new major creates a little califath, with   
   >>    the appeal of bombay   
   >> - Jeff Bezos gets his energy from space, and puts   
   >>    data centers there, and saves the florida crocodiles   
   >> - Trump still does parties in Miami, and not in NY   
   >>    and the epstain files have still not been released.   
   >>   
   >> LoL   
   >>   
   >> Bye   
   >>   
   >> Ross Finlayson schrieb   
   >>> If you're going to read Rene 'Renatus' DesCartes,   
   >>> and his approach to elements, he doesn't just take   
   >>> them apart, he does so in a way that the elements   
   >>> put themselves back together.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)