From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Mar 1 11:31:36 2000
X-Digest-Num: 380
Message-ID: <44114.380.2115.959273826@eGroups.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 11:31:36 PST
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sets etc.


la pycyn cusku di'e

>Finally, a class may
>be viewed collectively, and then the properties attributed to it have 
>little
>to do with the properties of the individual but rather with matters like 
>how
>many there are of them

And yet, it is possible to think that being one is a property
the individual, like having a certain weight. Then the cardinality
of the mass is really the mathematical sum of this property of
the individuals. So even this very settish property is applicable
to masses.

>or (more related to their proerties) what toher
>classes they belong to -- cardinality, inclusion, and the like -- set
>theoretic properties, in short, which only rarely have value in ordinary
>discourse.

And when they may have value it is not hard to find the mass
equivalent:

le'i cinfo cu klesi le'i mabru
The set of lions is a subset of the set of mammals.

lei cinfo cu klesi lei mabru
The lions are a subclass of mammals.

Are we saying anything different, or less clear?

This is not to deny that sets have their uses for logicians
and mathematicians but just to insist on what little use
they have for ordinary Lojbanists or ordinary speakers of
any language.

>For the most part, then, the use of the set markers is, like all of MEX, in
>the system
>because someday we may want to talk mathematics, the most recognizable 
>special
>language system within our (and every) language.

But other languages don't have special grammar rules to
talk mathematics, do they? Is it really believable that
fluent Lojbanists will be inclined to talk mathematics
in what looks like some strange code from the point of
view of everyday Lojban?

>As for JCB's lo -- it was a muddle and everyone -- even JCB -- knew it was 
>a
>muddle of half a dozen different ideas floating around in his head.

Yes, that's what it looked like to me too, from what I read.

>I think
>we now have most of them sorted out in Lojban, though we still seem to get
>into fights over a few from time to time (and pretty generally, having
>forgetten how we solved it the last time, come up with the opposite 
>solution
>the next).

Yes, but the fights are worth it. They are not identical
each time. I think we learn something from them collectively,
if not individually...

co'o mi'e xorxes


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com