Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Prbir-0003rf-7m; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:47:10 -0800 Received: by yxd5 with SMTP id 5sf2974093yxd.16 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=t4ceuKdz5uX/LUquNCZ8LqtGhAO7N//n5hTWzqudAS0=; b=IhxO8QA66XJkiBRys5iXwI+jOk9ANHIcNv0BEn0NKIHc0fCG9BNMAo7AaWI9UlJ/vk bABb0oquRpUsMvntnXw5KsqFFXA4xYVLUAkLLHwR1c59hEbpPIQxYkVy6vL0ZcIb0Pms QfICzc+exKmmGS7cVrBz+thGxMv4xZz9bdPI0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=w953dcdj0CDtFG6fRo6Ud6zrbghEwzCkpRwa0npIzdRupEiapllYdbPLxq27I55wix xjFQ/7lFVuH2I5RLL11yzKgMxtwU3dXtLrk/WhCGSeKfVX+zFzq7zhVmBDf/++CaU8Xc Pk1sF9jxRqqki/6wHv1AmHUzgVrgC1xzC1sm0= Received: by 10.151.106.2 with SMTP id i2mr279724ybm.3.1298317611203; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:51 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.57.97 with SMTP id b33ls5582417ibh.0.p; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.225.10 with SMTP id iq10mr173102icb.14.1298317610556; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.225.10 with SMTP id iq10mr173101icb.14.1298317610444; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gf5si826163icb.6.2011.02.21.11.46.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:49 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.182; Received: by iyj12 with SMTP id 12so1263493iyj.27 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.206.207 with SMTP id fv15mr1435423ibb.123.1298317609101; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.199.141 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:46:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201102171403.40004.phma@phma.optus.nu> <201102171622.02738.phma@phma.optus.nu> From: Luke Bergen Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:46:28 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Question about {roda} To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba4fc218e56b86049cd01fd4 Content-Length: 7629 --90e6ba4fc218e56b86049cd01fd4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable oh, maybe that's where my confusion lies. So if I'm a logician and I'm trying to talk about "for every X if X is human than X is mortal" how would you do that? How do you say in a prenex that "ok, {roda} here is actually everything, our universe of discourse is.... everything". 2011/2/21 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Luke Bergen > wrote: > > My only concern is that if {roda} has an implicite {poi co'e} then I'm > not > > sure what you could put in for that {co'e} that gets you back to the > strong > > EVERYTHING that logicians want. > > What exactly is this strong everything? In Logic there is always a > domain of discourse for the variables to take their values from. See > for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantification > > "In logic, quantification is the binding of a variable ranging over a > domain of discourse. The variable thereby becomes bound by an operator > called a quantifier." > > Or: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_of_discourse > > "In the formal sciences, the domain of discourse, also called the > universe of discourse (or simply universe), is the set of entities > over which certain variables of interest in some formal treatment may > range. The domain of discourse is usually identified in the > preliminaries, so that there is no need in the further treatment to > specify each time the range of the relevant variables." > > You can't really do quantification without a domain of discourse. > > > lojban makes it very easy to narrow a concepts meaning (with tanru, wit= h > > poi/noi, with further bridi, etc...), but there are very few ways (none > that > > my fever-addled brain can think of at the moment anyway) that expand a > > concepts meaning. So if we take something as widely expanded as {ro} a= nd > > say "oh, but it's not really universal all the time" then what CAN you > say > > that is consistently universal? > > "ro" says that the bridi is true for ALL the values in the universe of > discourse that the variable bound by the quantifier can take. Of > course it's consistently universal. > > The problem seems to be that some people believe that there is some > absolute universal universe of discourse that includes all possible > universes of discourse or something like that, but there isn't. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den. > > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den. --90e6ba4fc218e56b86049cd01fd4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable oh, maybe that's where my confusion lies. =A0So if I'm a logician a= nd I'm trying to talk about "for every X if X is human than X is m= ortal" how would you do that? =A0How do you say in a prenex that "= ;ok, {roda} here is actually everything, our universe of discourse is.... e= verything".

2011/2/21 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> My only concern is that if {roda} has an implicite {poi co'e} then= I'm not
> sure what you could put in for that {co'e} that gets you back to t= he strong
> EVERYTHING that logicians want.

What exactly is this strong everything? In Logic there is always a domain of discourse for the variables to take their values from. See
for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantification

"In logic, quantification is the binding of a variable ranging over a<= br> domain of discourse. The variable thereby becomes bound by an operator
called a quantifier."

Or: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_of_discourse

"In the formal sciences, the domain of discourse, also called the
universe of discourse (or simply universe), is the set of entities
over which certain variables of interest in some formal treatment may
range. The domain of discourse is usually identified in the
preliminaries, so that there is no need in the further treatment to
specify each time the range of the relevant variables."

You can't really do quantification without a domain of discourse.

> lojban makes it very easy to narrow a concepts meaning (with tanru, wi= th
> poi/noi, with further bridi, etc...), but there are very few ways (non= e that
> my fever-addled brain can think of at the moment anyway) that expand a=
> concepts meaning. =A0So if we take something as widely expanded as {ro= } and
> say "oh, but it's not really universal all the time" the= n what CAN you say
> that is consistently universal?

"ro" says that the bridi is true for ALL the values in the = universe of
discourse that the variable bound by the quantifier can take. Of
course it's consistently universal.

The problem seems to be that some people believe that there is some
absolute universal universe of discourse that includes all possible
universes of discourse or something like that, but there isn't.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because y= ou are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.<= br> To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--90e6ba4fc218e56b86049cd01fd4--