Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:54:05 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PQMKr-000339-VU; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:53:42 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PQMK5-00032x-SM for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:54 -0800 Received: from mail-px0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PQMJz-00032V-Op for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:53 -0800 Received: by pxi11 with SMTP id 11so384443pxi.7 for ; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.200.6 with SMTP id x6mr2707202wff.351.1291823562013; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [68.35.167.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f5sm999035wfg.14.2010.12.08.07.52.39 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:52:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 08:52:36 -0700 From: Alan Post To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: natural and human rights Message-ID: <20101208155236.GA8013@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org References: <885332.19254.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <885332.19254.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alanpost@sunflowerriver.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 1330 Lines: 51 On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 07:12:20AM -0800, A. Piekarski wrote: > coi ro do > > Please comment: > > 1) mujyselpo'e > > p2 is a natural/inalienable right possessed by p1 >   > from: > p2 se ponse p1 lo munje >   > 2) remselpo'e >  p2 is a human right possessed by p1 >   > from:p2 se ponse p1 lo remna >   > totus > I've gotten used to saying "se broda" for definitions like this that it first seemed weird that you reversed the x1 and x2 places. I haven't seen enough words to know whether the Lojbanic order for these places should be reversed from what you've got. I remember you bringing up this issue and if I recall we didn't find any concensus. I suspect this means we get inconsistency instead, so let me focus on something else! Let's pretent I'm having a converation: .i mi cuska lu .i mi mujyselpo'e lo nu badna li'u .i do cuska lu .i do na mujyselpo'e lo nu badna li'u I claim to have an inalienable right to bananas, yet you claim I don't. How do we further discuss the matter? Even though we're claiming the right is inalienable, we don't agree on the set of things that are appropriate for p2. Have we begun to resolve these outside of the bridi places and taken out epistemology places? Should the enforcement authority or social norm granting p2 have a place? -Alan -- .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi