From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Fri Nov 08 11:59:18 2002
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 08 Nov 2002 11:59:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05)
	id 18AFHe-00073m-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2002 11:59:14 -0800
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 11:59:14 -0800
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Is importing ro *really* "normal" in modern logic? (Re: importing ro)
Message-ID: <20021108195914.GG22931@digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <0H59009BEBO6HN@mxout3.netvision.net.il>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0H59009BEBO6HN@mxout3.netvision.net.il>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 2545
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 02:22:12PM +0200, Adam Raizen wrote:
> The *best* evidence that in modern logic universal quantification does
> not have existential import comes from pc's own website
> (http://users.aol.com/pycyn/quantify.html):
> 
> pc> Lojban, following the modernest of logics, fell in with this
> pc> scheme. Although it has several ways of saying ?All S is P,? they
> pc> are all equivalent and all ultimately the first:
> pc> 
> pc> roda zo?u ganai da S gi da P
> pc> 
> pc> roda poi S cu P
> pc> 
> pc> ro lo S cu P
> pc> 
> pc> ro S cu P
> 
> I guess opinions do change, even logicians' opinions.

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/  http://www.lojban.org/
la lojban. jai curmi roda .einai to ku'i so'ada mukti le nu co'a
darlu le'o -- RLP                            I'm a *male* Robin.