On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:11 PM, John E = Clifford <kali= 9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:

A so des!=C2=A0 Sorry to be so slow..=C2=A0 A mass is a k= ind extended to be closed under "part of", a kind is the intersec= tion of a mass and an individualizing principle (say "viable organism&= quot; for lions from lion).=C2=A0 But the relations are formally the same, = the jest of mereology (member/subset -- they fall together).=C2=A0 Or, from= my on the ground view, kinds grow upward from individuals to bunches and m= asses grow downward, from individuals to physical parts to ultimate atoms, = the smallest things that are still of the sort (atoms, molecules, cells, et= c.).
I'm not at all sure what this says about Lojban and {lo} expressions or= about levels, come to that.=C2=A0 But at least I am, I think finally near = the page you all have been on for awhile.

From: maikxlx <maikxlx@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 14, 2011 6:= 55:26 PM

Subject: Re: [lojban] = Lions and levels and the like

Ah, you jarred my memory.=C2=A0 Having studied Bunt, I think that I can mak= e some sense of your earlier writings about Le=C5=9Bniewskian sets (L-sets)= and Cantorian or classical sets (C-sets) e.g. http://pc= kipo.blogspot.com/2009/09/c-sets-and-l-sets-draft.html=C2=A0 I take it = that your "bunches" are basically L-sets as there described then?= =C2=A0 I am not quite sure how L-sets work differently than C-sets, other t= han they can't be nested and {a} =3D a.=C2=A0 C-sets clearly handle ind= ividuals efficiently and masses poorly; how do L-sets handle masses and ind= ividuals?=C2=A0 Or is there a difference?

FWIW, Bunt's "ensembles" which I mentioned are a bit diff= erent than your L-sets.=C2=A0 Ensembles are a set-like structure in which m= ass is the basic concept, and atomic individuals are derived or secondary.= =C2=A0 Any non-empty ensemble may contain or atomic members (essentially a = count ensemble), or for lack of a better word non-atomic "stuff" = (mass ensemble).=C2=A0 It could also contain both atoms and non-atomic stuf= f.=C2=A0 Count and mass ensembles may combine in predicate relationships fr= eely as in "The five rings were gold".=C2=A0 So they seem pretty = useful for capturing human language semantics.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011= at 4:16 PM, John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hmmm! =C2=A0Nice case! =C2=A0Of course, some fi= rst transistor must have been invented that all the others copied and impro= ved upon, but that doesn't really dodge your point. =C2=A0At the moment= , I don't know what to suggest, except to hope that Lojban still has=C2=A0a word for kinds. =C2=A0Bunches are, inter alia, Lesniewski's = wholes (but xorxes doesn't like this kind of objectifying, preferring p= lural reference, which works the same way formally). =C2=A0I don't take= 1a to be about kinds, but just about =C2=A0 =C2=A0 some unspecified bunch = of lions (at least in Lojban, lo cinfo). =C2=A0Kinds don't seem to be t= he sort of things that ruin gardens, though their exemplars may. =C2=A0The = factual situation, as far as transistors, etc. are concerned, is about gene= alogy, all transistors descend from something invented by Shockley. =C2=A0B= ut that is at least as hard to express as types, so I wait a while on it.

Sent from my iPad

On Nov 14, 2011, at 2:24 PM, maikxlx <= ;ma= ikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:

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 ensemb= le, 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/%7Eh2816i3x/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@ya= hoo.com> wrote:
>
> Here we have the advantage of taking kinds and the like as bun= ches (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 <jj= llambias@gmail.com>
> 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 <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.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribe= d to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.c= om.
> 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 &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubsc= ribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.googl= e.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.googl= e.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.