Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]:33676) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RQ34y-0006kp-RY; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:40 -0800 Received: by vws16 with SMTP id 16sf4604789vws.16 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from: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; bh=ojd8eo37T+6h/iFCTQqPeHm4WwTSpYg9vmFVrtylz2U=; b=vghDt5Kpyz/aiERKqR2VNdVNHMDBi30CGea5FRO2khdT0EZqAh+EQFdTCvUd4Z4kRD erMq9gN8yXsLb6GyALl/u/WYD4ZtX6CGGY0WPzgy72+C/2SZqMFhb+ghxEfnsZ1/FQkx uXxVVcDWbOk4BQd9nw5pHQYq1DWlg+ppbEG7c= Received: by 10.52.173.110 with SMTP id bj14mr4372885vdc.3.1321302263217; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:23 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.2.12 with SMTP id e12ls13726643ani.3.gmail; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.101.105.24 with SMTP id h24mr3295655anm.43.1321302262140; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.101.105.24 with SMTP id h24mr3295654anm.43.1321302262097; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gx0-f176.google.com (mail-gx0-f176.google.com [209.85.161.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e24si2371151ybi.3.2011.11.14.12.24.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.176; Received: by ggnp1 with SMTP id p1so2690715ggn.7 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.199.6 with SMTP id jg6mr49178434pbc.26.1321302261740; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.224.8 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1321289156.24832.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20111112173901.GC2702@gonzales> <1321289156.24832.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:24:21 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Lions and levels and the like From: maikxlx To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: maikxlx@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=maikxlx@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f642d16f3b5f104b1b7a7a8 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / --e89a8f642d16f3b5f104b1b7a7a8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I can understand the appeal of your concept of bunches -- if I understand them correctly as being something like subsets of the extensions consisting of mundanes/atoms (perhaps generalized to something like Bunt's ensemble, derivative of Le=C5=9Bniewski 's mereology, to cover masses). E.g.: - (1a) Lions are ruining my garden. - (1b) There exist some lions that are ruining my garden. where (1a) invokes a kind and (1b) invokes a bunch or somesuch, and yet both sentences seem to have the same truth conditions or almost the same. But yesterday as I was reading random online materials (this one - http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~h2816i3x/Talks/GenericitySeattle.ho.pdf ), I found what I think is a good bunch-resisting, kind-example: - (2a) Transistors were invented by Shockley. One can't get the same result by referring to any bunch: - (2b) *There exist some transistors that were invented by Shockley. Nor does taking the biggest possible bunch of transistors help: - (2c) *All transistors were invented by Shockley. It seems that though transistors as a kind of thing were invented, no mundane transistor nor any extension, ensemble, or bunch of them was invented. In (2a) there does seem to be some sort of "transistor kind" (dare I say "form") above the mundane, even taking into consideration the possible worlds that Montague would have in his model. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:45 AM, John E Clifford wrote: > > Here we have the advantage of taking kinds and the like as bunches (without > ontological commitment of things called "bunches"): {su'o lo stuci) has > essentially the same result under either interpretation, a subbunch of lo > stuci. It may, of course, not correspond to the bunches put in as kinds of > teachers, but it produces a kind of its own. Of course, there remains the issue > of how this bunch talks to all the students, but, as I have noted elsewhere, it > all works out to there being some teachers (mundanes) who talk to all the > students, even if no one teacher does. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas > To: lojban@googlegroups.com > Sent: Sun, November 13, 2011 7:10:17 AM > Subject: Re: [lojban] Lions and levels and the like > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Martin Bays wrote: > > > > What I mean by this (i.e. by "really"): if B hears A say {su'o ctuca cu > > tavla ro le tadni}, and B wants to understand what A means to say about > > actual teachers and actual students, and if {ctuca} and {tadni} do not > > specify levels, then B has to guess which levels A intends them to refe= r > > to. If, for example, B guesses that A is talking about kinds of teacher > > and about actual students, all B can deduce about actual teachers and > > students is that every student was talked to by some teacher. > > You have some hidden assumptions there, for example that there are > actual teachers of the kind that talks to every student. > > And B can deduce more: that there is some kind of teacher such that > every student was talked to by some teacher of that kind. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. > --=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. --e89a8f642d16f3b5f104b1b7a7a8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I can understand the appeal of your concept of bunches -- if I understand t= hem correctly as being something like subsets of the extensions consisting = of mundanes/atoms (perhaps generalized to something like Bunt's ensembl= e, derivative of Le=C5=9Bniewski 's mereology, to cover masses). =C2=A0= =C2=A0 E.g.:

- (1a) Lions are ruining my garden.=C2=A0

- (1b) There exist so= me lions that are ruining my garden.

where (1a) invokes a kind and (= 1b) invokes a bunch or somesuch, and yet both sentences seem to have the sa= me truth conditions or almost the same.

But yesterday as I was reading random online materials (this one - http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~h2816i3x/Talks/GenericitySeattle.ho.pdf ), I found what I think is a good bunch-resisting, kind-example:

- (2a) Transistors were invented by Shockley.

One can't get = the same result by referring to any bunch:

- (2b) *There exist some = transistors that were invented by Shockley.

Nor does taking the big= gest possible bunch of transistors help:

- (2c) *All transistors were invented by Shockley.

It seems that though transistors as a kind of thing were invented, no m= undane transistor nor any extension, ensemble, or bunch of them was invente= d.=C2=A0 In (2a) there does seem to be some sort of "transistor kind&q= uot; (dare I say "form") above the mundane, even taking into cons= ideration the possible worlds that Montague would have in his model.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:45 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> = Here we have the advantage of taking kinds and the like as bunches (without=
> ontological commitment of things called "bunches"): {su'= o lo stuci) has
> essentially the same result under either interpreta= tion, a subbunch of lo
> stuci. =C2=A0It may, of course, not correspo= nd to the bunches put in as kinds of
> teachers, but it produces a kind of its own. =C2=A0Of course, there re= mains the issue
> of how this bunch talks to all the students, but, a= s I have noted elsewhere, it
> all works out to there being some teac= hers (mundanes) who talk to all the
> students, even if no one teacher does.
>
>
>
>= ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
> To: <= a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com">lojban@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 13, 2011 7:10:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [lojban] = Lions and levels and the like
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 2:39 = PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> = wrote:
> >
> > What I mean by this (i.e. by "really"): if= B hears A say {su'o ctuca cu
> > tavla ro le tadni}, and B wa= nts to understand what A means to say about
> > actual teachers an= d actual students, and if {ctuca} and {tadni} do not
> > specify levels, then B has to guess which levels A intends them t= o refer
> > to. If, for example, B guesses that A is talking about= kinds of teacher
> > and about actual students, all B can deduce = about actual teachers and
> > students is that every student was talked to by some teacher.
= >
> You have some hidden assumptions there, for example that there= are
> actual teachers of the kind that talks to every student.
>
> And B can deduce more: that there is some kind of teacher such= that
> every student was talked to by some teacher of that kind.
= >
> mu'o mi'e xorxes
>
> --
> You receiv= ed 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@googlegroups.c= om.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl= =3Den.
>
> --
> 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 gro= up, send email to = lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den= .
>

--
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.
--e89a8f642d16f3b5f104b1b7a7a8--