Ontological Requirements for Annotation and ... - The CIDOC CRM

6) the factual-problem has the form "how, in what way does X happen, or manifestsitself?".At the time of writing, we are instantiating these problem templates by filling the emptyspaces in the question with instances of concept. For example:(def-instance what-is-virtue definitional-problem((contains-concept virtue)(has-problem-type multilemma)(exists-in-area ethics)(related-to-problem what-is-value)(is-tackled-by-View Plato-philosophy Aristotle-philosophy stoic-philosophy)(linked-to-fact death-of-socrates)))A much more interesting solution would be instead letting any instance of philosophicalideabe filling those spaces. This would result in a powerful reification mechanism: e.g. wecould define a problem about the relation between two other problems. Moreover, we arealso investigating how to use these structures for producing inferences (e.g. from arelational-problem, we can create a path which links to the definitional-problems ofthe concepts related). These and other issues (such as how to classify problems accordingto their ʻcontentsʼ e.g. "moral problem" or "epistemological problem") will be investigated infuture research.3.4 MethodVarious ontologies introduce a class named ʻprocedureʼ, with reference to any sequencelikespecification. Similarly, a heuristic or method in philosophy is essentially defined as aseries of steps leading from a problem towards its solution. Depending on whether themethod suggests a practical activity, or an intellectual one, we classified instances asbelonging to abstract-method or practical-method (see fig. 7).The main types of abstract-method are logical-mathematical-method, rule-ofinferenceand argumentative-method. The first one subsumes algorithm and comprisesinstances such as “the quick-sorting algorithm”, Wittgensteinʼs “truth-table method” orLeibnizʼs “infinitesimal calculus”. The second class refers to rules that are used to justifythe steps in a formal proof of the validity of a more complex argument. For example, wecan have “modus ponens”, “hypothetical syllogism”, “conjunction”, “double-negationelimination” etc. The class fallacy, instead, refers to invalid argumentative steps that mayappear convincing at first glance because they closely resemble legitimate patterns ofreasoning. For example, fallacies can be the “illicit major”, “affirming the consequent”,“denying the antecedent”, “affirming the alternative” etc. Finally, the class argumentativemethodcategorizes famous and well-established argumentation styles, such as “deductiveargument”, “argumentum a fortiori”, “argumentum ad hominem”, “argumentum adpopulum” etc.