1. Philosophy and Computer Science: New Perspectives of Collaboration
Maria Daskalaki
Center for Cultural Informatics
Institute of Computer Science
Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas
Nuremberg

2. Posing the problematic
The rapid development of computer science brought along many problems concerning the designing and the classification of the existing knowledge and information.
Realization of the importance of conceptual modeling which aims at expressing “the meaning of terms and concepts used by domain experts to discuss the problem and to find the correct relationships between concepts” (
Need for declarative representations which should have “as much generality as possible to ensure reusability but would at the same time correspond to the things and processes they are (representations) supposed to represent” (Barry Smith, Cristopher Welty, Ontology: “Towards a New Synthesis”, FOIS, 2001,IV).

3. Computer sciences and philosophy
Similar questions concerning the possibility of the correspondence between reality and systems of representation have arisen in Philosophy.
My aim here is to try to exploit the advantages of the related philosophical research and to point out some “confusions” and ambiguities that emerge in the context of information sciences but could be clarified with the aid of philosophy.
The 1980’s: J. McCarthy, J. Sowa
The 1990’s: N. Guarino, B. Smith, T. Gruber
Now: disengagement of the information sciences from philosophy
However: the question is if the collaboration with philosophy could bring results related to the epistemological questions that emerge in the context of information sciences.

4. Analyzing the problem
“different databases may use identical labels but with different meanings or “the same meaning may be expressed via different names” (B. Smith, “Ontology”, in: Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information, Oxford: Blackwell, 2003, , p.159).
If this is true, is the interoperability and compatibility between different data base systems possible?
If the systems are interoperable and compatible they are also sustainable and expandable.

5. Interoperability and communication
HOWEVER:
The interoperability issue could be formulated in the philosophical framework in terms of communication and its preconditions!
If the analogy between the need of interoperability and the philosophical significance of communication is correct then we have to analyze the parameters that are needed in the process of communication, in order to draw conclusions that will be useful for the information sciences.

6. Intersubjectivity and the construction of the meaning
Intersubjectivity as a crucial precondition of communication!
Intersubjectivity is closely related to the sphere of the construction of the meaning and with the preconditions that this must fulfill in order to be valid.
The meaning consists of propositions which refer to things in our world and which are regarded by the majority of the members of that world as true.
In order to construct communicable, comprehensive, acceptable and valid assertions about the world, the meaning should transcend the limits of individuals and refer to the reality, which the subjects share.

7. “Fuzzy” notions
Need for clarification of some notions related to the concept of communication which are used in the framework of computer sciences in a fuzzy, loose way:
Valid assertions do not imply an “objective truth” which refers to an objective world.
We should not confuse the level related to the way we express and formulate our knowledge (philosophy of language) with that related to our cognitive powers (theory of knowledge) or to the nature of the objects of our perception (ontology).
The topic of interoperability is related to the meta-level of analysis of the ways, in which subjects and their objects are mediated. At this level collaboration with philosophy could be very fruitful.

8. Philosophical views
However, in the domain of philosophy of language the question about the validity of our assertions remains active.
philosophical perspectives:
The solipsistic perspective which holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure.
The relativistic perspective according to which our views and assertions have “only relative, subjective value according to differences in perception and consideration”
The constructivist perspective according to which humans can not come to know the truth about the natural world without being mediated by knowledge of the world, which is always a human and social construction. Yet there is always the risk to conclude that the assertions about the reality is the result of a more or less arbitrary agreement.

9. Philosophical views
The theory of reference according to which the meanings refer to the objects of our reality as an external factor which can provide us a criterion for the validity of our assertions. The fact that words refer to things in the external world, does not necessarily mean that the words have only a descriptive function (theory of direct reference-Russell). They can also be mediated from the nets of the meanings that are valid within a certain group of people within a certain time span (theory of mediated reference Frege-Strawson, Saerle).

10. Objective ground of our systems
The demand for interoperability, which arises in the framework of computer sciences, prompts us to search for criteria which can be applied in different disciplines of knowledge and can provide the tools for the constant expansion and compatibility between different data base systems!

11. Quality of our concepts
the notions we use should be the result of the reflection on the “empirical material“.
They cannot be particulars! That would lead to solipsism!
Conclusion: In order to achieve interoperability, expansion compatibility and sustainability we first have to investigate the possibility of finding an objective ground to detect universal concepts which emerge from the experience but do not assimilate with it. In this task the assistance that philosophy can provide may prove decisive.