# How to Agree to Disagree: Managing Ontological Perspectives using Standpoint Logic

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.06793 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.06793/

## Key facts

- Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 2 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Jun 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Finite Model Theory of the Triguarded Fragment and Related Logics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.08377/) (2021)
- [Some Model Theory of Guarded Negation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.06299/) (2020)

## Built on by (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [Tractable Diversity: Scalable Multiperspective Ontology Management via Standpoint EL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13187/) (2023)
- [Towards Propositional KLM-Style Defeasible Standpoint Logics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.04245/) (2024)
- [Pushing the Boundaries of Tractable Multiperspective Reasoning: A Deduction Calculus for Standpoint EL+](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14323/) (2023)
- [Extending Defeasibility for Propositional Standpoint Logics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.10133/) (2025)
- [Vagueness in Predicates and Objects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13189/) (2023)
- [Automated reasoning support for Standpoint-OWL 2](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.00559/) (2023)
- [Supporting Risk Management for Medical Devices via the Riskman Ontology and Shapes (Preprint)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.09875/) (2024)
- [A Conceptual Model for Attributions in Event-Centric Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.03563/) (2025)
- [Standpoint Logics with Defeasible Beliefs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.08503/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The importance of taking individual, potentially conflicting perspectives into account when dealing with knowledge has been widely recognised. Many existing ontology management approaches fully merge knowledge perspectives, which may require weakening in order to maintain consistency; others represent the distinct views in an entirely detached way. As an alternative, we propose Standpoint Logic, a simple, yet versatile multi-modal logic "add-on" for existing KR languages intended for the integrated representation of domain knowledge relative to diverse, possibly conflicting standpoints, which can be hierarchically organised, combined and put in relation to each other. Starting from the generic framework of First-Order Standpoint Logic (FOSL), we subsequently focus our attention on the fragment of sentential formulas, for which we provide a polytime translation into the standpoint-free version. This result yields decidability and favourable complexities for a variety of highly expressive decidable fragments of first-order logic. Using some elaborate encoding tricks, we then establish a similar translation for the very expressive description logic SROIQb_s underlying the OWL 2 DL ontology language. By virtue of this result, existing highly optimised OWL reasoners can be used to provide practical reasoning support for ontology languages extended by standpoint modelling.