Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:42990)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCNuStaWoDxC6zdT1BBoE6ZEDGw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RMf12-0005MJ-T3; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:36 -0700
Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20sf6592269wye.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent
         :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=L2EMWMfI4QEACs8VpH8cXAHablLliKiit5ey2yF28gc=;
        b=a4EF/zgzpVyyZp0cGWNtb+0cQgYlFbs6Z+kpGbfTc3ZKPlSLcgbpJfUb5l/iP5hVLH
         dndRbSy9SUx1uEo3Pp25ot+dk39DmMYhsXeqz5eHdh/RRenfoLbVpnbb+45y3UZZA7nM
         ZXGQD6oixYrMGrZoT/lTGQHFCGxJQjI0yE+XI=
Received: by 10.216.137.214 with SMTP id y64mr678352wei.26.1320494778567;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.227.105.194 with SMTP id u2ls8249363wbo.5.gmail; Sat, 05 Nov
 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.206.133 with SMTP id fu5mr1377700wbb.3.1320494777648;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.206.133 with SMTP id fu5mr1377699wbb.3.1320494777631;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f173.google.com (mail-wy0-f173.google.com [74.125.82.173])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id es13si6460014wbb.3.2011.11.05.05.06.17
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.173;
Received: by wyh22 with SMTP id 22so3853016wyh.18
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.184.204 with SMTP id s54mr1956513wem.20.1320494777463;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.84] (87-194-76-177.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.76.177])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ei16sm19889777wbb.21.2011.11.05.05.06.15
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4EB526B7.7070008@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 12:06:15 +0000
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
References: <4EA7BF06.5050103@gmail.com> <4EAA8AC9.2010000@gmail.com> <20111029001437.GA5535@gonzales> <4EAC2461.4040307@gmail.com> <20111029172822.GC9385@gonzales> <4EAC5B24.4000604@gmail.com> <20111103234955.GA3758@gonzales> <4EB43035.6040407@gmail.com> <20111104233756.GB24058@gonzales> <4EB4A123.7030305@gmail.com> <20111105061247.GE24058@gonzales>
In-Reply-To: <20111105061247.GE24058@gonzales>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

I think the essential difference between us is indeed the semantic-metaphys=
ics. On one view, the universe comes with a ready-made set of individuals, =
to which predicates apply; propositions make claims about those individuals=
. On the other view, the universe is one blob that can be split into uncoun=
tably infinitely many subtypes, defined by differentiation criteria.

Here's a solution (v) then: have a couple of cmavo that mark these two view=
s, the Ready-Made and the Blobular. I really think that would work.

Obviously you're a Ready-Madeist, while me and xorxes are Blobularists. Tra=
ditional logic (i.e. what John Clifford calls Traditional Western Logic) an=
d formal semantics is Ready-Madeist. Cognitive and natural-language-inspire=
d approaches to semantics are Blobularist.

I was tempted to change the Subject-line, but by now "{zo'e} as close-scope=
 existentially quantified plural variable" has become the inalienable name =
of the thread, a name to which one has come to attach deep sentimental valu=
e.
 =20
Further responses below:

Martin Bays, On 05/11/2011 06:12:
> * Saturday, 2011-11-05 at 02:36 +0000 - And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.com>:
>> As for whether all frenchmen do wear the same beret, that depends on
>> beret differentiation criteria. By the usual beret differentiation
>> criteria, they don't wear the same beret. But given that it is
>> possible to say that we all admire (the same) Obama and that millions
>> of children each play with (the same) Barbie, I think that it would be
>> possible to think of a Barbie-like Beret that pops up on the heads of
>> many different frenchmen. I leave open whether the Barbie-like
>> Beretrequires a different predicate from the berets that each pop up
>> on only one head.
>
> Yes, that's exactly the issue. Your Barbie-Beret is a malkind in the
> above sense if it satisfies "is a beret".

I understand.
 =20
>>> So in the sense that if we would say that one is true then we'd also sa=
y
>>> that the other is true, (A) and (B) are equivalent in malkindful lojban=
.
>>
>> Do you mean they are truth-conditionally equivalent, or simply that
>> each, when supplemented by auxiliary assumptions, can be inferred from
>> the other?
>
> Something like both... see "metatruth" in my reply to xorxes (which is
> clumsy, but I don't see a better way to describe the situation).

I understand. It's a useful notion.
 =20
>> If Barbie-like Beret is a malkind, then (B) is derivable
>> from (A) only if it is also the case that all frenchmen wear the same
>> beret; if they all wear different berets, you can't derive (B).
>
> Hmm? Doesn't (A) imply that all french people wear Barbie-Beret?

Only metatruly. Under Blobularity, you first have to apply differentiation =
criteria to the universe before you can make claims about it. One set of di=
fferentiation criteria yields a many-bereted universe, and another set of d=
ifferentiation criteria yields a single-bereted universe. (A) itself doesn'=
t entail or imply that all Frenchmen wear Barbie-Beret. But (A) can be clai=
med of either the many-bereted or single-bereted universe.

Under Ready-Made, of course, it is as though one set of differentiation cri=
teria was applied to the (Blobular) universe once and for all, and thereaft=
er only that universe gets claims made about it.

>> So it seems to me that either (A) doesn't entail (B) malkindfully or
>> that xorxesianism is not malkindful.
>
> I don't see what you've done here.

I hadn't realized you were talking about metatruth rather than truth. Truth=
 would be assessed relative to a post-differentiational universe. Metatruth=
 is assessed relative to the set of all possible post-differentiational uni=
verses: claims X and Y are metatruth-conditionally equivalent if there is a=
 predifferentiational Blobular universe such that there are differentiation=
 criteria that yield from it a postdifferentiational universe of which X is=
 true and there are differentiation criteria that yield from it a postdiffe=
rentiational universe of which Y is true.
 =20
>>>> Sure, we know what the difference between one lion and two lions is.
>>>> But there are these cases where you can't tell the difference. And
>>>> I think that these cases in which the speaker can't tell the
>>>> difference should be generalized into a case where for whatever reason
>>>> the speaker doesn't tell the difference.
>>>
>>> But do we really need to create a new entity to do that? In examples
>>> like the "lion(s) in your garden every day", we can just give a vague
>>> count - {su'o cinfo}, in that case.
>>
>> Yes, but it looks like one lion, not like a group of one or more
>> lions.
>
> Then {pa ju'o ru'e cinfo}?

That doesn't sound like a very Baysian solution...

I had been wondering whether to suggest {su'o cinfo pa mei} (disregarding t=
he vagueness that tanru introduce), but I'm not sure whether or not that ca=
sts us into an infinite regression, since {PA broda} can always be recast (=
metatruly?) as {su'o broda PA mei}.
 =20
>> There's only disagreement on beret-counting. Or Obama-counting: if
>> I don't agree that there is only one Obama, then I'd object to you
>> claiming that "ro prenu cu prami su'o Obama" and "su'o Obama cu se
>> prami ro prenu" are equivalent.
>
> If you were happy to choose once and for all whether you want multiple
> berets (one for each french person, say) or just Barbie-Beret, there
> wouldn't be such a problem. But you want both, in different situations,
> don't you? With all of them ransedyta'uing?

Yes. Ready-Made and Blobular give different metatruthful results.

--And.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.