Scot Mcphee on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 15:25:20 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Critique of the "Semantic Web"

>> My point actually was not that there would be a danger in the  Semantic Web
>> to confuse the two Nettimes (since avoiding such ambiguities as opposed
>> conventional full text queries is its very design objective), but quite the
>> opposite: That with its goal of unambiguous categorization, it reduces, or
>> even fails to acknowledge, the  cultural complexity of the phenomena it
>> references.
> Even after reading Reto's precise counter arguments and explanations I still
> agree with Florian's evaluation of the Semantic Web project.  What I actually
> don't see is why Florian insists that the notion of  ontology as used in the
> domain of the semantic web  is so different from the  use in philosophy. Fr

What I don't understand why they don't just use the word "taxonomy".  
Isn't that what it is? Indexing and classifying. Sounds like a bunch  
of butterflies and insects pinned into a glass cabinet to me. Or does  
the word somehow conjure unwanted notions of enlightenment gentlemen  
doing exactly that - and it's an unwanted comparison that Florian  
makes, much to their discomfort.


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact: