From lojbab@lojban.org Tue Jun 13 15:44:35 2000 Return-Path: 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 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:45:36 -0400 To: Robin Lee Powell , lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo In-Reply-To: <200006132134.RAA18515@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <20000613212343.20679.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 3055 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