From lojban+bncCNf8pM-bDBCnuNnhBBoEtAMcug@googlegroups.com Thu Jul 08 16:16:08 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OX0K4-0001E0-1Z; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:16:07 -0700 Received: by gyg4 with SMTP id 4sf2357595gyg.16 for ; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:15:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received :sender:received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=mOavsc1rT4sayfdYO7YeVQ/P95SJCRWtz1yqK56dmzU=; b=1BdzeK/VOKcVzpm8Zyz/0vBhNfZhuLHp6nEnDQBOYs4w9UL3770B8R2bDZYFiOXGWK FIsBWp1dUYHyOevuKaMskeeD2JYsbpyKMWStTB7NOVEIhoblo61rWpWQKN1JGfU1w4mN QZVzn8A4XC1/98fAONmDRAmE/nE3aOunuseQg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=KOFw7PyjvsF+xBw79IQn+NH5tnh5EHDETLl3a3+hDxbmu3HYgCnuhlr/oOCyiYhHR8 iq0sGsk9/HSW08CmcprfJuGPquIiGxge7YMo1m75A7hYyrrslnoD4Xj1awPKXuE3lhA9 1qXHTyeGt6tTDfA6I+OsgzMVvHC9B0g90zbOI= Received: by 10.101.61.6 with SMTP id o6mr946470ank.17.1278630951767; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:15:51 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.150.241.31 with SMTP id o31ls8525ybh.5.p; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:15:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.229.11 with SMTP id b11mr634989ybh.29.1278630950679; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:15:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.236.151 with SMTP id w23mr294783weq.14.1278627398762; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.236.151 with SMTP id w23mr294781weq.14.1278627398701; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f178.google.com (mail-wy0-f178.google.com [74.125.82.178]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id p38si905521wej.12.2010.07.08.15.16.37; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.178; Received: by mail-wy0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 38so1090078wyb.23 for ; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.146.139 with SMTP id h11mr1313594wbv.197.1278627397330; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.86.211 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 23:16:37 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] beyond good and evil From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: paskios@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.178 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=paskios@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65b5844d167c4048ae7a33e --0016e65b5844d167c4048ae7a33e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 8 July 2010 20:58, Luke Bergen wrote: > It seems to me like the abstract concept of virtue (lo ka vrude) is > fundamentally different from a specific event of something being virtuous > (lo nu vrude) which are both different things, I think, from a thing being a > virtuous entity (lo vrude). I can see that {lo vrude} may be differentiated from {lo ka vrude} and {lo nu vrude} for practical reasons. But how is {lo ka vrude} so significantly different from {lo nu vrude}? Both are abstract in that they don't refer to a concrete individual object. And {lo nu vrude} isn't necessarily a *specific* event of something being virtuous, just like {lo nu klama} can mean any kind of event of going. {lo nu vrude} can even be conceptual or non-factual, just like {lo nu mi ricfu traji} can refer to an imaginary event. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --0016e65b5844d167c4048ae7a33e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 8 July 2010 20:58, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
It seems to me like the abstract concept of virtue (lo ka vrude) is fundame= ntally different from a specific event of something being virtuous (lo nu v= rude) which are both different things, I think, from a thing being a virtuo= us entity (lo vrude).

I can see that {lo vrude} may be differentiated from {lo ka vrude}= and {lo nu vrude} for practical reasons. But how is {lo ka vrude} so signi= ficantly different from {lo nu vrude}? Both are abstract in that they don&#= 39;t refer to a concrete individual object. And {lo nu vrude} isn't nec= essarily a *specific* event of something being virtuous, just like {lo nu k= lama} can mean any kind of event of going. {lo nu vrude} can even be concep= tual or non-factual, just like {lo nu mi ricfu traji} can refer to an imagi= nary event.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--0016e65b5844d167c4048ae7a33e--