[Crm-sig] E21 Person, E67 Birth

Christian-Emil Smith Ore c.e.s.ore at iln.uio.no
Tue Sep 24 16:52:11 EEST 2019


​Be bloody, bold, and resolute; laugh to scorn
The power of man, for none of woman born
Shall harm Macbeth.​
act 4 scene 1


Dear all,

As we all may know Macduff brought into this world by (a kind) of cesarean section .  For Shakespeare this was not a birth (event).



The class E67 Birth  in CRM was designed for practical purposes. It was formulated by solely male modelers as Thomas hints to. The fact that the mother is only modeled (E67 Birth is a subclass of E5 and not of E7) as a participant among others has been slightly criticized, and is a somewhat disputable solution.  A cesarean section is without doubt an instance of an E7 Activity and may by some not be considered a birth.



Conception can be seen (as it is by many) bringing a human being into existence. In the case of identical twins there is an extra split of the first cell, so conception is not completely correct etc etc. In Korea a child is one year old from birth …



Still my view is that the current E67 Birth class is a practical-pragmatic solution to model information about birth (place, time, mother, twins, other persons involed,etc)  found in cultural heritage documentation.



One may develop this further (birth modeling) but that should be a part of the social relation extension in my view.

​


Best,

Christian-Emil

________________________________
From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>
Sent: 23 September 2019 20:12
To: Franco Niccolucci
Cc: crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] E21 Person, E67 Birth

Dear Franco,

I agree in all points.

The problem with an ontology as the CRM is of course not to create any prejudice for or against a doctrine or ethical position.

As we agree, the CRM has to do with things that are identified in historical documentation practice. The amount of matter present in a human body over time and the eternal soul, by rebirth or after conception, free will or determined by context etc. allows for many definitions of what a person is. Therefore, in the CRM, we take from this the minimal commitment, which is not in conflict with any wider definitions. This (E21) is between birth and death, as an Actor and a material body. It makes no statement whatsoever, if a person in social or divine understanding extends to more.

Concluding, I do not see any conflict with the Catholic position, nor a Buddhist one. We state that "end of pregnancy" may not result in an E21, regardless what someone regards as a person.

In other terms, we do not make philosophies about exhaustive definitions of categories of reality. We make minimal commitments in order to have an agreement about identity of things we refer to by a mechanical system, and which we can use for scholarly, non-mechanical, non-mathematical exchange of things in relation to such identities (or not).

Would you agree?

All the best,

Martin

On 9/23/2019 5:38 PM, Franco Niccolucci wrote:

Dear Martin, I agree with you. I tried to suggest a solution with what we have, of course introducing new entities/properties may be even better.

However, when stating that a birth event may not end in a new E21 Person we must be very careful. According to the doctrine of Catholic Church, a Person exists since the very first moment of conception, when the first cell comes into existence and starts splitting. Such cell or assembly of cells is assumed, for example, to have a soul since the very beginning of its existence. Maybe also the Orthodox Church has the same belief.

I am just mentioning the above without taking part in favour or against, of course.

Thus end of pregnancy should not be opposed to Birth unless we formulate the scope note of the latter very carefully. I mean that what distinguishes a Birth from an end of pregnancy which is not a Birth should be stated without offending anybody.

On a different but related note, I think that a clear distinction among the different cases of end of pregnancy where the baby is not born alive is unlikely to be documented in historical documents, so a generic category would probably suit better this particular case.

Best

Franco

Prof. Franco Niccolucci
Director, VAST-LAB
PIN - U. of Florence
Scientific Coordinator
ARIADNEplus - PARTHENOS

Editor-in-Chief
ACM Journal of Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH)

Piazza Ciardi 25
59100 Prato, Italy




Il giorno 23 set 2019, alle ore 15:51, Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr><mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr> ha scritto:

Dear Franco, All,

I agree, we have typically no coming into existence, or it is quite undefined. This is a nice case to discuss the border cases we encounter with all concepts.

Typically, the biological process is that of birth or alike. The stillborn baby may be buried without social identity given. We could have a type of Birth, with all except the coming into existence. We could agree that ontologically, there is some coming into existence, but a birth event does not necessarily end in a new E21 Person.

The methodologically important question is which states of ignorance do we encounter? Are the typical historical documents, in which the outcome of a document birth may be unknown as it is in reality before it happens? Or are the stillborn or miscarriage clearly distinct, because we normally describe birth as secondary information about a Person?

I assume the typical document uncertainty is between abortion, miscarriage, stillborn or dying at birth, but clearly separated if the baby lives. As an independent event, it is alternative to Birth. That would rather suggest a superclass of Birth, ending pregnancy.

Best,

Martin

On 9/23/2019 12:58 PM, Franco Niccolucci wrote:


As already explained I would better avoid Birth, and even Coming into existence.
 Birth has two properties P96 by mother and P97 by father, the former being of course more important. Using E5 Event does not allow this, so you can only use P11 had participant. If I remember well there is no P11.1 in the role of, but perhaps this may be harmlessly added. If not, a dirty solution is giving a Type to the Actor involved like
P11 had participant E39 Actor ‘Mary Doe’ P2 has type “mother”
Maybe colleagues can find a more elegant solution; type in this case is a role, not a property of the lady. But in my opinion only a *P11.1 in the role of ‘mother’ would work.

Best

Franco

Il giorno lun 23 set 2019 alle 11:34 athinak <athinak at ics.forth.gr><mailto:athinak at ics.forth.gr> ha scritto:
Dear Franco,

your comments are very useful and I think you are right, maybe this is
about a more general concept or we may miss something with the
definition of E67 Birth(?). And what about the parents? they are
participants in this biological event? Especially the mother who acts,
performs intentionally, especially in cases of stillborn, the procedure
is to start labour. I am concerned with the definition of the birth
event.

Thank you for the feedback

Athina


Στις 2019-09-23 11:45, Franco Niccolucci έγραψε:


My suggestion would be to avoid being involved in ethical and
religious discussions (when does the ‘person’ start to be such?)
and go one step up in the entity hierarchy so:
* instead of E21 Person use E20 Biological Object (superclass of E21)
qualified with P2 has type
* instead of E67 Birth use E5 Event qualified with P2 has type. In my
opinion using instead E63 Beginning of existence (superclass of E67)
is risky because applying the identity criteria to a fetus is
uncertain and subject to ethical discussion, so the only safe solution
is to record when it manifests to the world with a birth or
miscarriage.

Best

Franco

Il giorno lun 23 set 2019 alle 10:21 athinak <athinak at ics.forth.gr><mailto:athinak at ics.forth.gr> ha
scritto:



Dear all,

I am working on a project relating to historical information
(sources)
on Seafaring lives and Maritime Labour in 19th-20th century - we map
the
raw data to CIDOC CRM (or an extension of it). Historians collect
data
from various records, such as Civil Registers, which are records
documenting persons born or dead - basically, they register the
deaths.
So I have this case: they register as  persons the miscarriages or
the
stillborn or the abortions, and they assign attributes such as the
number of registration,  personal information (name,surname,etc. )of
the
parents, the place of residence (which is the parents address, of
course) and the sex of the aborted or still born (something they
knew
afterwards). I suppose this is a difficult ethical and biological
subject- my question is how would you model the miscarriage or the
still
born or the abortion? It is not exactly defined as E21 Person and if
it
is a case of still born, it can be a kind of a E67 Birth Event, but
if
it is a miscarriage, I believe it is not a birth event, it is a
different biological process, so what is it?

Any thoughts that would help?

thanks,

Athina Kritsotaki
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig


_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list

Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig


--
------------------------------------
 Dr. Martin Doerr

 Honorary Head of the
 Center for Cultural Informatics

 Information Systems Laboratory
 Institute of Computer Science
 Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)

 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
 GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece

 Vox:+30(2810)391625
 Email:
martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>

 Web-site:
http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl


_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig



--
------------------------------------
 Dr. Martin Doerr

 Honorary Head of the
 Center for Cultural Informatics

 Information Systems Laboratory
 Institute of Computer Science
 Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)

 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
 GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece

 Vox:+30(2810)391625
 Email: martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>
 Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20190924/c3c5687c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list