From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 12 10:28:46 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 12 May 2006 10:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FebRD-0006lK-E1 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:28:27 -0700 Received: from web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.124]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FebRC-0006lC-FC for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:28:27 -0700 Received: (qmail 81174 invoked by uid 60001); 12 May 2006 17:28:24 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=3bA2f9wNJKsB9Y4covxus6vbbc98rX7ffBOJ63RP6tv/ln2WIo2Fj3aHrY2dSdXkHg3rPWSFGsit1sgi4q+54wSAZAqBEI9VF1jUsTyjaFqvGzuf2BU0CLyMNxEqtl76hH2HJGz256eS4USiz9J2qtSEc1XZLuq2FKk3dJPPcL8= ; Message-ID: <20060512172824.81172.qmail@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.237.223.173] by web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:28:24 PDT Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:28:24 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: furry species? To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <200605121137.13626.phma@phma.optus.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-archive-position: 11517 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Well, individually, no. However, in the applied set theory of the sort that Lojban seems to have assumed for all these years, they may distributively, i.e, all their members do. Of course, that theory never got spelled out and now it seems much less misleading to use at least a different term from "set" to describe what is involved, hence "bunch." --- Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Friday 12 May 2006 09:41, John E Clifford > wrote: > > This gets philosophically murky. A species > of > > bears is presumably at least a bunch of bears > and > > of course a bunch of bears can have > > (distributively) fur. > > I've been thinking of species as sets. Sets > don't have fur. > > You could say {lo cribe be roda cu se gacri lo > kerfa}, but {lo cribe be roda} > sounds like a bear that belongs to all species > of bears at once, which > doesn't exist. More pedantically, {ro se cribe > zo'u lo cribe cu se gacri lo > kerfa}. > > phma > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to > lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to > http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to > secretary@lojban.org for help. > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.