Your Lambda Calculus question

[Tril]

> I believe, is the central issue with the lambda-calculus to which I
> object: that abstraction is seen as one-dimensional, at least from the
> frame of reference of each object.  More dimensions can be simulated,
> but only at a high cost in terms of readability/clarity.  (more on this
> issue later...)

I agree.  I examined the lambda calculus, and decided it was not intuitive
enough for me.  Thinking in lambda calculus is not natural.  Of course,
many languages are based on it and it is a useful paradigm, so it can be
one of the first "ontologies" supported in the system, but as you
suggested, we need something inherently multidimensional for the
general-purpose (meta-ontology) abstraction system.

David Manifold <dem@tunes.org>