|
ANNOTATION:
Ontology and epistemology
Personally, as an artist, I prefer to use the term "epistemology" for the (language based) description and the term "ontology" for the phenomenalogical experience or manifestation of the consequences of the description.
Perhaps this helps to clarify the relationship between "external" (observer based epistemological) viewpoints and "internal" (participant based ontological) viewpoints, which in turn might relate to differences between more classical (descriptive, "objective", truth based) science and more modern (participatory and simulatory "subjective" phenomenological based) approaches.
"Ontology" might therefore be concidered purely "semantic" -while an "epistemology" has both "syntactic" (the description itself) and "semantic" (the ontological interpretation) aspects.
Clearly, the "epistemological" language also has its own "ontology" (as does each description/model within that language).
So perhaps we can envisage the whole system as a "look-up table" constructed in multi-dimensional conceptual space.
This space then represents the "ontology" of the language, a specified set of coordinates will define a specific "epistemological description" -while the related "ontology" is "located" at the intersection.
In turn, this "meta-space" may presumably be located at some intersection within another (meta-meta)space -just as the ontological interpretation is also a multi-dimensional "phenomenological" space.
Once mapped, such a model should enable us to move effortlessly from internal "subjective" to external "objective" worlds -and to conceptually (or actually) modify them in order to explore their connections within the nexus (the topology of local or global space).
Copyright© 2000 Principia Cybernetica -
Referencing this page
|
|
|
