From xod@sixgirls.org Mon Aug 27 01:17:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 27 Aug 2001 08:17:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 46008 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 08:17:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Aug 2001 08:17:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Aug 2001 08:17:54 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.6/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7R8Hrs19381 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:17:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:17:53 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Induction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Nick Nicholas wrote: > induction is sucta. deduction and abduction are both tolsucta. deduction is > the logical reverse of abduction. Thank you! But shouldn't we distinguish abduction from deduction? And where does nibli fit in? ----- "It is not enough that an article is new and useful. The Constitution never sanctioned the patenting of gadgets. [...] It was never the object of those laws to grant a monopoly for every trifling device, every shadow of a shade of an idea, which would naturally and spontaneously occur to any skilled mechanic or operator in the ordinary progress of manufactures." -- Supreme Court Justice Douglas, 1950