From lojban+bncCNf8pM-bDBCjxbjyBBoEOstdYA@googlegroups.com Fri Aug 19 01:45:36 2011 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QuKhp-0003mY-Fm; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:35 -0700 Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11sf2917381gwb.16 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=0AAu0y4BAiv4zihcN9cdCw2snrdX3DKf3xEXbwnGMZs=; b=rPafAPFH6yxIAMqJ/QqIIzLgTmoelAkZIkU41Ky9EHtIZxX0JQfq8Lpz6+2mh9xEGH d5T+B+zyfmLYkeQF9TQziyF1q/NbrY9/QE07I1p/mQxCcyaOKUwBiK2530GkdU7XF03w TXUy1oBK6MVmPth6xdAHEYv3p96AJYITyCEbA= Received: by 10.236.72.138 with SMTP id t10mr496898yhd.6.1313743523272; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.41.5 with SMTP id t5ls2206959anj.2.gmail; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.137.32 with SMTP id p32mr1895198ann.4.1313743520722; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.137.32 with SMTP id p32mr1895197ann.4.1313743520706; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f170.google.com (mail-gx0-f170.google.com [209.85.161.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k18si3366842anf.3.2011.08.19.01.45.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.170; Received: by mail-gx0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 27so3500329gxk.1 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.78.200 with SMTP id g48mr5556708yhe.12.1313743520627; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.147.136.10 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:45:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110811101134.GF10697@gonzales> <1313159555.91794.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20110812152917.GK10697@gonzales> <20110813082934.GO10697@gonzales> <1313242205.82409.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20110813150339.GR10697@gonzales> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:45:20 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] xorlo and masses 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 209.85.161.170 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 18 August 2011 14:58, Jonathan Jones wrote: > I do not say that something must have at least a brain and eyes in order to > be lo viska. I said that the eyes are not what sees. > What I will say is that > in order to be lo viska, the thing in question must be capable of seeing. A > blind man has both eyes and brain, but the blind man does not see. Right, so the part-whole relation is not essential to the selbri's meaning. And what ultimately determines what X is, is not what X 'is' but what X does, how X functions, i.e. what occurs. Something is lo viska if it represents the event of potential or actual see-ing as a subject. We don't need presuppositions like "eyes are not lo viska because eyes do not include a brain". > As to the rest of your arguments, I didn't bother reading them, because, > quite honestly, I don't care what you have to say on the subject, because I > just don't care enough about the subject to waste that much time on it. I'm > not going to read that. I'm just going to say this- As far as I'm concerned, > you are being way too technical and nit-picky. While such inane > detail-oriented blather might be relevant in scientific discussions, it is > not so in everyday conversation. Apologies for the rudeness of the last > statement, I'm at a loss for a way to say that more politely at the moment. Distinguishing everyday practicality from physical reality was quite my point. If we literally get down to the bottom of the physical things, we will see that there is no boundary between anything. But that's not the paradigm our everyday conversation takes place in. We cannot talk about things without misrepresenting the undivided as divided things. We cannot say of physical reality what is X and not Y without a non-physical framework, without going above the physical into the meta-physical. Such frameworks are arbitrary and various. Usefully so. We use different meta-physical frameworks to talk about reality from different perspectives, to configure perceptions in different ways. "mi" is sometimes a bag of flesh, sometimes a group of dyes embedded in a photographic film, sometimes the executive system of a thought, sometimes a memory stored over a neural network, sometimes a sound file recorded on a computer, sometimes a cultural icon impersonated by other people, sometimes a set of impulses causing someone to cry, and so on. What I wanted to suggest is that we could realize and accept degrees of arbitrariness when we say "X is a brain", "a rhino is X", etc., and be not too serious about whether the physical reality of a "rhino" is such that it must be more than a "brain". mu'o -- 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.