|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Obviously, these types involve more kinds of occurrents than only processes. First, achievements appear to be extrinsic changes, as they are assumed to happen instantaneously. The choice of extrinsic changes, as opposed to intrinsic, is based on the notion of culmination which seems to refer to a realizable difference. States, as defined by Casati and Varzi (16) seem to refer to the realm of relations and facts, since there are no changes (in an intuitive sense) involved.
What remains are achievements and accomplishments, which are at least
extended in time like processes. However, we doubt that these are an
adequate classification of processes due to relying on the notion of
homogeneity. Homogeneity is not a property of a process individual,
but it is a property of some process universal,
like walking. Neglecting granularity aspects, one can agree that all
temporal parts of an individual walking are also instances of
walking. However, this is not a property of the individual. For
instance, we may extend the description to ``John walks
from
Culmination allows for a similar argument. It seems to be based
on identifying what can be derived at the end of the process. A
culminating event is associated with an end point. This does not mean,
however, that a non-culminating event does not have an end point. Each
walking of John finds an end, and could thus also be
classified as an accomplishment in the form, John walked to For the above reasons, we refrain from accepting the distinction between achievements and accomplishments as a classification for process individuals, although we acknowledge that these terms refer to process universals. Note that difficult questions of the identity of processes touch the issues just discussed. Nevertheless, we will not address such issues, as they are not in the focus of this work. Robert Hoehndorf 2006-10-18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||