From sentto-44114-2171-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Fri Mar 03 20:42:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 29935 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2000 20:42:15 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 2000 20:42:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 24050 invoked by uid 40001); 3 Mar 2000 20:42:11 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 24047 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2000 20:42:10 -0000 Received: from hm.egroups.com (208.48.218.15) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 2000 20:42:10 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-2171-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.35] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Mar 2000 20:42:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 15320 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2000 20:41:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Mar 2000 20:41:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.7) by mta2.onelist.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 2000 20:41:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 88840 invoked by uid 0); 3 Mar 2000 20:41:36 -0000 Message-ID: <20000303204136.88839.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.41.247.38 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:41:35 PST X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.38] To: lojban@onelist.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:41:35 PST X-eGroups-From: "Jorge Llambias" From: "Jorge Llambias" Subject: Re: [lojban] The Quine challenge Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Jorge Llambias" > > - Membership in A is compatible with membership in any other club. > > - Membership in B precludes membership in any other club. > > > > Are they contradictory? > > I'm waiting for John's answer on this. > >I think they are: preclusion is irreflexive, symmetric, and transitive. >When did I suggest that preclusion was not symmetric? When you gave this example against my contention that every club must be final: >This definition is too inclusive. Here's an example. > >Membership in Club A does not preclude membership in any club. >Membership in Club B precludes membership in every other club. >Membership in Club C precludes membership in Club D. >Membership in Club D precludes membership in Club A. >Membership in Club E precludes membership in Clubs A and C. >There are no other clubs. How can membership in A not preclude membership in any club and at the same time membership in D preclude membership in A? That's where I got the idea that maybe by "preclusion" you meant something like the rules of the club. Obviously Club A can have no precluding rule and D preclude its members from being members of A. I take it that is not what you meant? So, how is it possible that some club is not final and at the same time final clubs are well defined? Can we have an example? co'o mi'e xorxes ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/937/1/_/17627/_/952116113/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com