From sentto-44114-3057-960936275-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Tue Jun 13 22:41:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 18951 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 22:41:55 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 22:41:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 11095 invoked by uid 40001); 13 Jun 2000 22:44:37 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 11092 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 22:44:37 -0000 Received: from mv.egroups.com (208.50.144.81) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 22:44:37 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-3057-960936275-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.38] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Jun 2000 23:44:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 11126 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 22:44:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Jun 2000 22:44:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-3.cais.net) (205.252.14.73) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 22:44:33 -0000 Received: from bob (209-8-89-82.dynamic.cais.com [209.8.89.82]) by stmpy-3.cais.net (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e5DMiVJ68135; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:44:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from lojbab@lojban.org) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000613183743.00b8acd0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 To: Robin Lee Powell , lojban@egroups.com In-Reply-To: <200006132134.RAA18515@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <20000613212343.20679.qmail@hotmail.com> From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@egroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:45:36 -0400 Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit At 05:34 PM 06/13/2000 -0400, Robin Lee Powell wrote: >"Jorge Llambias" writes: > >>From: Robin Lee Powell > >> > >> lo LE the really is > >> veridical descriptor: the one(s) that really > >> is(are) ... > >> > >>The implication is that the speaker is insisting that such a thing > >>really is. > > > >That is what the speaker claims, but why would a claim that the > >speaker makes and that you don't believe offend you? Only because > >it is about some god, I suppose. Or are you offended by any > >claim with which you disagree? > >I think I maybe just misunderstand lo. To me, 'lo cevni' sounds like >the English phrase 'the One True God(s)', which has a _huge_ mess of >underlying assumptions, many of which ignore the beliefs of 2/3s or so >of the planet, at least, depending on which god you're reffering to. First of all, lo is not necessarily singular, so you are making an assumption to associate it with a particular claim of deity. It is true that lo cevni is claiming the existence of at least one true deity, not necessarily an all-powerful creator God of the Christian sort, since I don't think that cevni requires that extreme. But it could also be referring to any number of perfected timeless souls that have moved onward from this world, or various other conceptions of deity that have existed in the various world's religions. In any event, do you criticize people who talk about unicorns for not examining the underlying assumptions, or those who talk about Sherlock Holmes, who is unquestionably a fictional character. (we've been over lo [unicorn] many times in this forum). lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers. http://click.egroups.com/1/4633/3/_/17627/_/960936245/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com