From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Fri Aug 27 13:35:31 1993
Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 27 Aug 1993 13:35:31 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 27 Aug 1993 13:35:24 -0400
Message-Id: <199308271735.AA11424@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 8477; Fri, 27 Aug 93 13:33:51 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with
 BSMTP id 9857; Fri, 27 Aug 93 13:36:25 EDT
Date:         Fri, 27 Aug 1993 09:28:05 BST
Reply-To: I.Alexander.bra0125@oasis.icl.co.uk
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Iain Alexander <I.Alexander.bra0125@OASIS.ICL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: TECH: Nec (Was: QUERY: quantifier scope & cumki)
X-To:         cowan <cowan@snark.uucp>
X-Cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: O
X-Status: 

la djan. kau,n. cusku di'e

> Ah, but you've been caught by the sting in the tail, namely that
> nec (a = a .implies. nec a = a) is a theorem, or in plain English,
> "Identity holds necessarily if it holds at all".  So nec 9 = #-of-planets.
> This takes us right into the theory of rigid and non-rigid designators,
> and all kinds of related grief.  Quine dumps this by just saying that Nec
> is a sentence operator which applies to quoted sentences.  This limits you
> in the inferences you can make, but it also prevents nonsense.

It looks like I'm getting rapidly out of my depth here, at least
for the time being.  I shall simply reserve my right to choose
my own axioms. :)

ca banzu

fe'o mi'e .i,n.