la .guskant. cu cusku di'e
Le lundi 10 février 2014 00:55:01 UTC+9, selpa'i a écrit :
Let's say the original single line segment L looks like this:
|-----------------------------------------------| <- {lo linji}
L
You seem to be saying that L is not an individual because we can
turn it
into multiple smaller line segments A, B, C, like this:
|---------------| |---------------| |---------------|
A B C
Further, you seem to be saying that A, B, and C are all among L. You
also seem to be saying that each of A, B, C are not individuals either,
because we can further split them, like this:
|-------|-------| |-------|-------| |-------|-------|
M N O P Q R
And that M and N are among A, and so on.
Is this what you are saying?
Yes.
But how does that work? If the original {lo linji} (L) is an individual, then only itself can be among itself. On the other hand, if it is *not* an individual, then we cannot call it {lo linji} in the first place. You could say that {lo linji} is more than one individual, and then the same things that applied to the singular L would apply again for each of the referents of the "more than one individual" L. At some point through the taxonomy, you must arrive at an individual or individuals and then you can't go further and say that even smaller things are among that individual. Even the shortest line doesn't have {lo mokca} {me} it.
For example, in the case of finite {lo ci prenu}, let us call the three
persons p1, p2, p3. In the universe of discourse. The following sumti
are all in the domain of plural variable that are prenu even if you
don't mention the sumti:
p1
p2
p3
p1 jo'u p2
p2 jo'u p3
p3 jo'u p1
p1 jo'u p2 jo'u p3
Yes.But I don't quite see how this is the same case. If this is what you were going for with the {linji} example, then it doesn't show anything that qualifies as not being one or more individuals.
The 7 possible plural values for {prenu} above are all one or more individuals. Listing infinitely many more would not change that.
Similarly, the infinite number of {lo linji} were in the domain of
plural variable that are linji when the universe of discourse was given
first.
Infinity does not preclude individualness. If you have an infinite number of "things", then you just have infinitely many individuals.
mi'e la selpa'i mu'o -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.