Nicola Guarino (1998)

A comparative analysis with the CoD

I. Abstract

Nicola Guarino’s formal methodology, developed for knowledge representation, is not a rival theory of existence but a methodological framework that builds upon a foundational commitment to substance ontology. This comparative assessment, using the OMAF, shifts focus from treating Guarino's work as a peer ontology to analyzing it as a case study. The analysis reveals that while Guarino's methodology provides powerful tools for classifying entities, its unexamined assumption—that reality is fundamentally composed of stable, classifiable substances with fixed identities—limits its capacity to account for emergence, change, and relational genesis. The CoD, by contrast, posits relation as primitive and process as primary, offering a more fundamental account of how the very categories Guarino's methodology takes for granted come into being. This strengthens the thesis that relational dynamics, not categorical structures, are ontologically primitive.

II. Overview of Guarino’s methodology as an ontology

Nicola Guarino’s work, primarily known through the OntoClean methodology, provides a rigorous, logical toolkit for validating the taxonomic structure of domain ontologies. Its core mechanisms—the definition of meta-properties like rigidity, identity, and unity—are designed to analyze and enforce consistency within class hierarchies. From the perspective of the OMAF, Guarino's work makes a definitive, albeit implicit, commitment on the fundamental questions:

• On primacy-of-existence: Primacy is given to substances or substantial universals. Entities are understood as stable instances of pre-defined classes. Relations are logical connectors between these independently existing relata. As Guarino famously states, 'I am not a class!' – a modeling rule that underscores the primacy of the concrete instance over its abstract category.
• On manner-of-existence: Existence is essentially static and classificatory. To exist is to instantiate a universal and possess essential properties rigidly. Change and process are secondary phenomena that happen to instances within the immutable bounds of their type.
• On the relationship-between-multiplicity-and-unity: Unity is achieved through subsumption. The universal (the one) logically precedes and unifies its instances (the many) through a formal hierarchy (the taxonomy). This is a top-down, tree-like structure where identity is secured by location within the hierarchy.

III. Overview of the CoD

The Conference of Difference (CoD) model claims that, as a 'condition of being', existence is, by extension, a 'process of declaring together of action to be'. This condition: 'process of declaring together' can itself be described as a conference of difference: a 'condition of bearing together' transforming the 'condition of bearing apart'. Logically, every conference is of difference as every difference is born of conference. Critically, this is not a causal circle but a constitutive one: neither term precedes the other; each is intelligible only through the other.^[1] Therefore, the conference of difference is irreducible in and of itself and thus the process primitive of existence.

In John I. Mackay: A CRUP-OMAF case study, its ontology is assessed as follows:

• On primacy-of-existence: The CoD reveals primacy, not in substance of entities but, in the relational process itself: the conference of difference—relation precedes relata. Entities' are discerned as stabilized patterns within this ongoing process. As declared in Koan 10.1, 'all existence is a conference of difference'. Relation is not something that happens between discerned entities but rather the process primitive that transforms existence itself.
• On manner-of-existence: The manner-of-existence is fundamentally conferential and transformative. Thus, being: 'action to be' is a continuous, dynamic process of 'bearing together' and 'bearing apart' – a constant negotiation that defines the 'condition of being' that is existence. 'All existence transforms via binding, not freedom' (Koan 30.7).
• On the relationship-between-multiplicity-and-unity: Unity is an immanent and continuous achievement of the conference of difference itself. Koan 80.1 frames this as a universal reciprocity that moves toward equilibrium—a self-organizing principle inherent to existence itself.

IV. Comparison

Criterion 1: Primacy-of-existence

• Statement: The models diverge sharply on what is considered ontologically primary.
• Guarino’s model's position: Guarino’s framework gives primacy formal universals (substances) and their instances. Relations are secondary, logical connectors between independently existing things.
• CoD's position: Primacy is given to the relational process. All entities, including our constructs of 'substance' and 'universal', are emergent, stable patterns within the conference of difference.
• Interpretive analysis: Guarino’s approach is top-down: the universal explains the instance. The CoD is generative: the relational interaction produces the semblance of substance. This allows the CoD to account for the fluidity of categories that a formal methodology must treat as fixed.

Criterion 2: Manner-of-existence

• Statement: The OMAF assessment identifies a radical divergence on the fundamental nature of how things exist.
• Guarino’s model's position: For Guarino, the manner-of-existence is static and taxonomic. Existence is the state of instantiating a universal. Change is a secondary problem to be managed within a rigid schema.
• CoD's position: The CoD posits that the manner-of-existence is dynamic and processual. To be is to be actively engaged in the 'conference of difference'. Existence is not a state of instantiating a type but the continuous activity of relational transformation, as captured in the koan: 'All existence is a conference of difference'.
• Interpretive analysis: Guarino's methodology is a powerful tool for a world already assumed to be structured. The CoD asks how that structure comes to be. The CoD's processual view accounts for the genesis of static categories, which Guarino's must take as axiomatic.

Criterion 3: Relationship-between-multiplicity-and-unity

• Statement: The handling of the one-and-the-many reveals a core philosophical schism.
• Guarino’s model's position: Unity is achieved by subsuming multiplicity under a single, pre-existing universal, creating a static, tree-like hierarchy.
• CoD's position: Unity and multiplicity are co-constituted. Unity is a temporary, dynamic 'bearing together' of differences, perpetually achieved through interaction.
• Interpretive analysis: Guarino secures identity by a thing's static place in a hierarchy. The CoD sees identity as perpetually negotiated through relation. This demonstrates that an ontology can be coherent without being monistic and static, embracing a flux where unity is earned, not given.

V. Implications

The single most important lesson from this comparison is not that two ontologies differ, but that a powerful methodology for classifying entities can rest upon an unexamined ontological commitment to substance. Guarino’s tools are invaluable for organizing a world assumed to be comprised of stable substances. However, the CoD demonstrates that this assumption is not a foundational truth but a special case—a stabilized pattern within a more fundamental process.

This comparison strengthens the case for the CoD by showing its capacity to explain the genesis of ontological commitment. Where Guarino's methodology must take its taxonomy of universals as a given, the CoD explains all categories – including 'substance', 'universal', and 'instance' – as emergent, stable patterns within the primordial conference of difference. This opens a new line of inquiry: how formal structures themselves evolve and transform.

This confrontation with a substance-committed methodology illustrates a key axis of differentiation: the choice between a static, classificatory framework for organizing being, and a dynamic, processual ontology for explaining its very emergence.

Gospel of being

All existence is a conference of
difference

Discover the process

From bosons to the cosmos and beyond.