From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCU9ZvyBBoEURN8Yg@googlegroups.com Sat Aug 13 15:28:49 2011 Received: from mail-qy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.216.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QsMhC-0000AY-FU; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:48 -0700 Received: by qyk33 with SMTP id 33sf4668199qyk.16 for ; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version: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:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=urChty79W7++dkmkKC2PvYaySesxzzAfiBxeqT8Iro4=; b=znpuax8DDVT/atMHiuildROcVc2FlJ6KBadsaqq8e24tRpOyb/UOXgy2jAsaOEw+6K iM3NpNlBjcISwlR+/Z2loH8GkVxKsXIEVjCVYvQkICi3qRK2qJ62QvqhhmwFt2op+y8Q rXHnlQ96+rnSgbpyV1DoYOcyyZrx7UuEUEJ+E= Received: by 10.229.11.31 with SMTP id r31mr267593qcr.39.1313274516169; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:36 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.224.174.15 with SMTP id r15ls8985966qaz.3.gmail; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.78.146 with SMTP id l18mr1688056qak.3.1313274515648; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.78.146 with SMTP id l18mr1688055qak.3.1313274515638; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f42.google.com (mail-vw0-f42.google.com [209.85.212.42]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i2si6333273qcv.1.2011.08.13.15.28.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.42; Received: by vwl1 with SMTP id 1so7546688vwl.1 for ; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.26.210 with SMTP id n18mr2152384vdg.500.1313274515421; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.101.170 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:28:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110813124739.GP10697@gonzales> References: <20110811101134.GF10697@gonzales> <1313159555.91794.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20110812152917.GK10697@gonzales> <20110813082934.GO10697@gonzales> <20110813124739.GP10697@gonzales> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 19:28:35 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] xorlo and masses From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Martin Bays wrote: > > My point then was that the following three assertions are inconsistent: > > (i) {ro lo broda cu broda} is a tautology > (ii) {ro loi broda cu broda} is a tautology > (iii) loi broda =3D=3D lo gunma be lo broda (i.e. have the same referents= ) > > Indeed, we can derive a contradiction with broda set to {na'e gunma}: > > ro loi na'e gunma cu na'e gunma =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (by (ii)) > ro lo gunma be lo na'e gunma cu na'e gunma =A0(by (iii)) > su'o gunma cu na'e gunma =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(by (i)) I tend to agree that (ii) is kind of inconsistent with (iii), but I don't think you have a proof there. Your third step relies on "lo gunma be lo na'e gunma" having at least one referent, but I don't think it does, since there are no such things as non-masses in an absolute sense. Everything is a mass of at least itself, so there are no non-masses in the absolute. You can only conclude that "su'o gunma be da cu na'e gunma be de", but that's no contradiction. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 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.