SBVR12 — Clarifications and Fixes for State of Affairs Related Entries

Business Semantics Ltd, Donald Chapin, (Donald.Chapin@BusinessSemantics.com)
Summary:
During recent in-depth SBVR RTF discussion on the topic of state of affairs a number of clarifications and fixes were identified as needed:
1. Add a missing Reference Scheme for ‘state of affairs’.
2. Add a Necessity to unambiguously distinguish states of sffairs from propostions.
3. Add a Note to clarify how the representations of the meanings in the reference schemes of state of affairs serve as definite descriptions of the state of affairs.
4. Clarify the relationship between 'is actual' and 'exists', and the relationship between actualities and potential states of affairs.
Resolution:
Makr the the fixes and add the clarifications as identified as being needed in the Issue Summary list above.
Revised Text:

ADD the following Reference Scheme, Necessity and Note to the “state of affairs” entry in Clause 8.5 on printed page 40:

Reference Scheme: an individual noun concept that corresponds to the state of affairs
Necessity: No state of affairs is a proposition.
Note: Any representation of a proposition may be used to denote the state(s) of affairs that it corresponds to. A proposition statement serves as a definite description for the state of affairs that the proposition coressponds to.

In the entry for “state of affairs is actual” in Clause 8.5 on printed page 40, REPLACE the Note and the Example:

Note: The meaning of ‘is actual’should not be confused with ‘exists,’ meaning existential quantification. A state of affairs can exist and thereby be involved in relationships to other things (e.g., plans, desires, fears, expectations, and perceptions) even if it is not actual, even if it never happens.
Example: “The EU-Rent London-Heathrow Branch wants to be profitable”. Even when that branch is unprofitable, the previous statement can correspond to an actuality that involves the state of affairs that the EU-Rent London-Heathrow Branch is profitable. The state of affairs exists as an object of desire and planning regardless of whether it is ever actual. The state of affairs is actual only when the branch is profitable, but it exists and is involved in an actuality (an instance of the verb concept ‘company wants state of affairs’) even when the branch is unprofitable.

WITH:
Note: The meaning of ‘is actual’should not be confused with logical existence, which just means being a thing in the possible world that is of interest. A potential state of affairs can 'exist' as a 'thing' in the possible world and thereby be involved in relationships to other things (e.g., plans, desires, fears, expectations, and perceptions) even if it is not actual, even if it never happens.
Example: “The EU-Rent London-Heathrow Branch wants to be profitable”. Even when that branch is unprofitable, the previous statement can correspond to an actuality that involves the desired state of affairs that the EU-Rent London-Heathrow Branch is profitable. The desired state of affairs exists as an object of desire and planning regardless of whether there is ever an actual state of profitability. It exists and is involved in an actuality (an instance of the verb concept ‘company wants state of affairs’) even when the branch is unprofitable. The nature of the desired state of affairs is that it is a 'desired state of affairs' – conceived, not perceived.
The actual state of affairs that the EU-Rent London-Heathrow Branch is profitable exists only when the branch is profitable. The nature of the actual state of affairs, if it exists, is that it is a happening in the world. It is perceived, not conceived.

In the list of Necessities” in Clause 8.5.2 on printed page 41, REPLACE:

Necessity: Each proposition corresponds to at most one state of affairs.

WITH:

Necessity: Each proposition corresponds to exactly one state of affairs.

Make the fixes and add the clarifications as identified as being needed in the Issue Summary list above