[Humanist] 28.819 an argument & belief system

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Sun Mar 15 08:23:07 CET 2015


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 819.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org



        Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 11:17:14 +0000
        From: Martin Mueller <martinmueller at northwestern.edu>
        Subject: Re:  28.812 an argument & belief system
        In-Reply-To: <20150314071750.8C4B6BD5 at digitalhumanities.org>


This argument & belief system stuff is very interesting. I think it's
related to a presentation I heard at Oxford. On the other hand, I'm
reading this post with the eyes of my colleagues in English and
History, and I doubt whether this way of presenting it makes any sense to
them whatever. Is it possible to describe in plain language what this
thing does and what it is that you can do with it that you couldn't do
before?

MM
Martin Mueller
Professor emeritus of English and Classics
Northwestern University

On 3/14/15, 08:17, "Humanist Discussion Group"
<willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk> wrote:

>                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 812.
>            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
>
>
>
>        Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:28:38 +0000
>        From: Dominic Oldman <doint at oldman.me.uk>
>        Subject: Re:  28.810 pubs on note-taking and on concerns for
>digital	humanities
>        In-Reply-To: <20150313062328.C0575BD6 at digitalhumanities.org>
>
>
>This sounds very interesting and my poor knowledge of this area (Rhetoric
>Studies) would benefit from reading this book [1].
>
>However, it may be worth noting that I am implementing practically an
>argument and belief system (within a BM project/team) using a
>specialisation of the CIDOCCRMwhich makes it possible to make assertions
>(beliefs) and convey arguments (observation, inference making and belief
>adoption). We implement it in the same 'real world' knowledge
>representation system used to represent 'canonical' data (although this
>is not a pre-requisite), and means that we can openly and transparently
>retain the full (connected) provenance of an argument and the assertions
>that evidence it (back to an original premise) that may take place over
>large periods of time  - and hopefully use computer reasoning to analyse
>the discourse. We are developing a software tool at the moment.
>
>This type of thing, to me, seems to address the Big Tent issue and is an
>essential contribution to DH/HC epistemology that helps define what the
>Tent is and what it is for.
>
>Anyway, as long as it isn't too expensive I will purchase a copy. :-)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Dominic
>        
>PS. Happy to explain the KR system to anyone interested - Its called
>CRMInf (Conceptual Reference Model Inference). Sorry if this is actually
>off subject and I have misunderstood.






More information about the Humanist mailing list