[lojban] Re: A Proposed Explanation of {gunma}

[Jorge Llambías <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On 12/15/05, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Yes, that would be nice.  I assume that he
> objects to the reification that seems to be
> involved in the use of a term like "bunch."  But
> the *entity* is inessential so long as whatever
> we are talking about has a relation like "in"
> ("among" in McKay) with all the relevant
> properties.

I think McKay would argue that bunches are yet another form
of "singularism". In his second chapter, "Against singularism",
he clearly states that plural language does not presuppose the
truth of the basic mereological principle: "whenever some things
exist, their fusion exists". Bunches, as you have defined them,
do presuppose this basic principle.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.