Re: [jboske] New Ontology

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

Nice! I have a couple of comments though.

> Any x in the real world is one of the following ontological types:

I take it this means "any x as broda". The same x as brode could
be of a different ontological type, right?

> 2. Non-atoms: things that may meaningfully be said to be composed of
> parts. These subdivide into:
>
> 2A. Wholes (what I formerly called atoms): Things where, for any
> sectioning of the entity into parts, either no part is broda (perfect
> whole), or at most one part is broda (chipped whole).

For example, da poi remna

> 2B. Stuff: Entities of which no part is a whole.

For example, da poi djacu

> 2C. Groups: Entities of which at least one part is a whole.

At least one part of x as broda is a whole as broda? Examples?
I'm not sure groups are ontological types in this sense.

> These ontological types may be conceptualised in three ways, and this
> is reflected on the outer quantifier (and, 'redundantly', lo/loi).
> These are the Counting Types.
>
> i. Individuals: instances singled out of a cardinality of things.
> (That an Individual of Stuff should be physically separate is
> probably a pragmatic default (spisa), because it is idiosyncratic
> when applied to numbers --- which are stuff, in that they do
> meaningfully have parts in a non-Platonic conceptualisation.)

Yes, instances taken one by one: each human being, each amount
of water, etc.

> ii. Collectives/Masses: instances described not by overt
> counting/quantification, but by describing the size of a portion and
> the number of bits from which the portion is formed. This is the
> lojbanmass, and includes my former Collective and Substance (what And
> calls Bit of Substance). This is what "an amount of" refers to in the
> gismu list.

I would have said "individuals taken together" for collective,
rather than "one by one". A collective of human beings is not the
same thing as a portion of a human being, whereas a collective of
amounts of water is similar to (or the same as) a portion of
(another) amount of water. You'd have to clarify what it is that
you're taking portions of. The procedure seems to be:

* for wholes, take every individual and collectivize, then
take portions of the collective with bits corresponding
to the original individuals.
* for stuff, define bits appropriately for the context, then
collectivize those bits and take portions of the collective.

Maybe this is what you meant, I'm not sure.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail