[Crm-sig] Issue: questionable Sunrise

Christian-Emil Ore c.e.s.ore at iln.uio.no
Tue Dec 15 17:14:43 EET 2009

I cannot see the problem in this matter at all. The only question was if 
Monet described (his sensation of) a given sunrise or if his painting 
describes his sensation of sunrises as such.


On 15.12.2009 16:05, martin wrote:
> Hi Steve, Fantastic, thank you, you found simple words for what I try to 
> say in all these messages!
> Stephen Stead wrote:
>> Dear all
>> Just got back from Brazil and realised that the "sunrise" is not the 
>> event
>> but "watching the sunrise" is the event! It was a very pretty sunrise 
>> as we
>> flew into Heathrow!!
>> Rgds
>> SdS
>> Stephen Stead
>> Tel +44 20 8668 3075 Mob +44 7802 755 013
>> E-mail steads at paveprime.com
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: martin [mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr] Sent: 11 December 2009 19:25
>> To: steads at paveprime.com
>> Cc: c.e.s.ore at iln.uio.no; 'crm-sig'
>> Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Issue: questionable Sunrise
>> Dear All,
>> I agree with Steve here, and suggest to change the example to a battle or
>> meeting.
>> To make my point with the event:
>> We must not confuse what an E5 is with what an event is. I am not 
>> concerned
>> if the sunrise is an "event"
>> in the linguistic sense. It is indeed an event in the sense of physics.
>> If we regard that the definition
>> of E5 should pertain to endurants leaving potentially traces or evidence,
>> the events of
>> conditions on states of affairs being fulfilled do not qualify for E5. 
>> Such
>> condition-based
>> events to my opinion neither have a natural notion of participants and
>> things being present.
>> To my understanding, a sunrise neither has well-defined things 
>> present, nor
>> natural
>> boundaries, nor does it leave traces. I first have to define the place to
>> identify the sunrise.
>> In battles, the battle identifies the place, and not otherwise round. 
>> If we
>> accept notions
>> comprising such fundamental differences of behaviour, we have no 
>> chance to
>> introduce any advanced
>> CRM-based reasoning.
>> I would like to take the occasion of this example to
>> discuss situations as an alternative concept, not to introduce it into 
>> the
>> CRM, but to understand
>> where it could appear in the CRM. I regard a sunrise as a "situation". 
>> If we
>> regard then "situation" IsA Temporal Entity,
>> then the sunrise is E2, and we avoid all ambiguities.
>> Best,
>> martin
>> Stephen Stead wrote:
>>> Dear all
>>> I think we may be getting lost here. If the "sunrise" is a particular 
>>> one
>> or
>>> not does not really matter UNLESS some other documentation refers to the
>>> same "sunrise". If there is, or we suspect that there is, then it is an
>>> event. If not then it is only necessary to link (P62) to the concept 
>>> of a
>>> sunrise so that we can find it as an example of the use of the concept.
>>> Probably rather reductionist but it works I think. For the Munch then we
>>> know there is documentation that points to the stroll-event, so it is an
>>> event; part of the event (P9) is a E65 Creation/F27 Work Conception.
>>> I think that this allows us to do everything in our intended scope but I
>> may
>>> be wrong!
>>> Rgds
>>> SdS
>>> Stephen Stead
>>> Tel +44 20 8668 3075 Mob +44 7802 755 013
>>> E-mail steads at paveprime.com
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr [mailto:crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr]
>> On
>>> Behalf Of Christian-Emil Ore
>>> Sent: 11 December 2009 08:40
>>> To: martin
>>> Cc: crm-sig
>>> Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Issue: questionable Sunrise
>>> Hi
>>> A sunrise is an event. In the Monet case it may or may not be. In the 
>>> case the painting describes a generalised conceptual understanding of 
>>> a sunrise it is in my opinion not.
>>> The Norwegian painter Edvard Munch connects  in his writings his 
>>> painting "Scream" to a  concrete event when he and some friends 
>>> walked in a park just outside  the centre of Oslo (Kristiania)  in 
>>> the early 1880s apparently in the late afternoon (early spring or 
>>> late autumn) when the sun was setting and Munch got the sensation of 
>>> the existential scream of nature. Thus the painting depicts this 
>>> feeling (concept) as well as in some sense the  stroll-event.
>>> (http://www.munch.museum.no/ekko/gr/skrik.htm)
>>> I think d) is the best solution but the Munch example may be too 
>>> complicated from a pedagogical point of view although it is a pretty 
>>> well known painting.
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian-Emil
>>> On 10.12.2009 21:35, martin wrote:
>>>> Are you sure? Did Monet not paint in the nature? I remember some French
>>>> term of plein-airists...
>>>> We have four choices:
>>>> a) accept the sunrise as event
>>>> b) find a better class for the sunrise
>>>> c) regard the depiction as conceptual, but for an IMPRESSIONIST, 
>>>> that causes me headaches
>>>> d) find a less ambiguous example and postpone our understanding of 
>>>> the true nature of the sunrise
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martin
>>>> Christian-Emil Ore wrote:
>>>>> I have another comment. Monet painting does not depict any 
>>>>> particular sunrise, just the concept of the sun rising (over Le 
>>>>> Havre). So the example should perhaps be replaced or changed from 
>>>>> event to type or conceptual object.
>>>>> Chr-Emil
>>>>> On 10.12.2009 16:03, martin wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Oeyvind,
>>>>>> Sure, we know what a sunrise is. I meant, what is the superclass 
>>>>>> of "sunrise" in the CRM.
>>>>>> I could regard it, as you say, as just a time-span (with 
>>>>>> time-zone). An E5 Event should bring about
>>>>>> a change of state. That it will be daylight after the sunrise 
>>>>>> could be regarded as a change of state, even
>>>>>> though the daylight line just sweeps over the earth. There is
>>>>>> however no interaction associated with it, as with any other 
>>>>>> occurrence patterns between
>>>>>> independtly moving things. There is no objective notion of 
>>>>>> "participants". There is no notion
>>>>>> of things "meeting", except may be for the photons. In this sense, 
>>>>>> driving a car from A to B could
>>>>>> be seen as consisting of thousands of events of passing stones 
>>>>>> next to the road.
>>>>>> We could regard is as E4 Period, since in the scope note we say, 
>>>>>> there is no need for change of state,
>>>>>> and assign a place and time to it.
>>>>>>  From a point of physics, there is no energy-mediated interaction 
>>>>>> between the participants, as with activities,
>>>>>> building crashes etc.
>>>>>> Just to clarify, where the borders of an event are. Is "passing 
>>>>>> by" at a distance without interaction an event
>>>>>> in the sense we need for the CRM? Do I pass by Auckland in a sense 
>>>>>> on my way from home to my bureau in Heraklion?
>>>>>> I suspect we are touching the notion of "situation" we have 
>>>>>> avoided to model so far.
>>>>>> Interesting problem, isn't it?
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>> Øyvind Eide wrote:
>>>>>>> Den 10. des.. 2009 kl. 14.38 skrev martin:
>>>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>>>> "“Impression Sunrise” by Monet (E84) depicts sun rising over Le 
>>>>>>>> Havre (E5) mode of depiction Impressionistic (E55)" :
>>>>>>>> One may argue, that "Sunrise over Le Havre" depicts a place and 
>>>>>>>> a certain timespan, but the sunrise itself might
>>>>>>>> not be seen as a process in the sense of the CRM, since it is 
>>>>>>>> just a question of a view on a constellation of deeply
>>>>>>>> independent things (rather a "situation"). May be, we should 
>>>>>>>> avoid the example, until we better know what a sunrise is?
>>>>>>> Dear Martin, and all,
>>>>>>> If we do not know now what a sunrise is, will we know better in 
>>>>>>> the future?
>>>>>>> I think the problem is not the word "sunrise". It is a normal 
>>>>>>> word with several related meanings: e.g. " a time of day", or 
>>>>>>> "any (major) awakening", as a dictionary will tell us.
>>>>>>> The problem is rather than when such a word is used in the title 
>>>>>>> of a painting, the meaning is not fixed, so that it can mean the 
>>>>>>> time of day, or it can mean the start of a new, totally different 
>>>>>>> part of person's life, just to take two examples. In order to 
>>>>>>> model such a text in a formalism such as CRM, one of the meaning 
>>>>>>> must be chosen (or maybe several, but always fewer than the 
>>>>>>> potential total number of possible meaning).
>>>>>>> In short, is this not a case similar to underspecification?
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>> Øyvind Eide
>>>>>>> Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
>>>>>>> Unit for Digital Documentation, University of Oslo
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list