Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750)
In-Reply-To: <ec8285e60606051812r724b24a9ta78749ba950171d2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ec8285e60605291626le1ada3eu128707e83e7627d@mail.gmail.com> <20060605202242.56556.qmail@web81315.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <ec8285e60606051812r724b24a9ta78749ba950171d2@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <7886206A-AE55-4E98-B39F-7493E7A2DBBB@umich.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 21:55:00 -0400
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
From: Alex Martini <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: alexjm@umich.edu
Subject: [lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all}
Content-Length: 2738
Lines: 71


On Jun 5, 2006, at 9:12 PM, Maxim Katcharov wrote:

> On 6/5/06, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> --- Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 5/29/06, Jorge Llambías
>> > <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On 5/29/06, Maxim Katcharov
>> > <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > My argument here was that the burden of
>> > proof is on you to show that
>> > > > a) this pluralist view exists
>> > >
>> > > You can check that the pluralist view exists
>> > for example starting
>> > > here:
>> >
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_quantification>
>> > > The "external links" at the bottom of the
>> > page are also interesting.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I don't argue that people don't support it, I
>> > argue that it has no
>> > distinct existance aside from "mass", and so is
>> > not correct.
>>
>> I suggest you actually read the book, especially
>> the formal semantics.  Or read some of Quine's
>> stuff (I'm sorry I don't have references to
>> hand).
>
> I've read the first chapter of McKay's, and found that the author
> confused several issues. For example, he states that Alice is not a
> shipmate on her own, when she clearly is. She is shipmate of Bryce and
> Carol, etc. because she is in the same group as them, and not a
> shipmate of David and Erica, because they are of a different group.
>
> Two things regarding the suggestion. First, it seems that you think
> that I don't understand how it works. I think that I do understand how
> it works, it's just that I disagree with it. Second, I'm not arguing
> with Quine, or McKay, because sadly they don't subscribe to this list.
> I'm arguing with you and xorxes. I expect you to be able to argue
> against my position as well as Quine or McKay would, otherwise you
> really have no business arguing for or  believing in their position.
> If I show you to be wrong, you'll may just end up falling back on "oh,
> well, that doesn't mean that Quine was wrong".
>

I beg to differ -- no person can ever be his own shipmate, any more  
than he can be his own sibling or classmate or anything else of that  
type. The word inherently implies a *different* member of the *same*  
group. For example, if I say {Alice and her shipmates arrived.},  
including Alice in her shipmates is quite absurd since she is then  
counted twice. If I say {All my classmates left the room.}, I don't  
include myself. These types of words simply don't allow a reciprocal  
relationship.

mu'omi'e .aleks.


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.