Subject: Re: [lojban] Qualities & Properties (was: Re: Another stab at a Record on ce'u

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:00:01 -0400

At 08:24 PM 8/29/01 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
>On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Nick NICHOLAS wrote:
> > cu'u la xod.
> >
> > [Free ka]
> > >I am not sure this distinction is useful enough.
> >
> > *shrug* Lojbab invokes it, and wants his 'abstract' {ka} to be the
> > default in those contexts (whether he realises it or not. :-) The debate
> > is on the very issue of whether this distinct is in fact useful or not.
>
>It may be time for him to step up and offer some examples.

If lojbab had the capability to offer ad hoc examples, lojbab would do 
so. The problem is that if you don't understand the differences I see, I 
know of no way to get you to see them.

> > >I might open a new can by demanding an example of the difference between
> > >"quality" and "property". Or I could be Lojbanic and observe that clearly
> > >whatever difference there may be in English, in Lojban at least as far as
> > >ka is concerned, there isn't any.
> >
> > I think I've been pretty explict on these (and I've been explicit
> > precisely because I know you like to raise this objection):
> >
> > .i lo se ckaji be su'o pa su'e re steci cu me zoi gy. property gy.
> > .i lo se ckaji be zi'o .a piro loi selbri sumti cu me zoi gy. quality gy.
> >
> > {le ka ce'u xendo zo'e zo'e} is a property.
> > {le ka ce'u xendo ce'u ce'u}, which some would call {le si'o xendo},
> > and others {la'ezo xendo}, (and which Lojbab was originally thinking of
> > as {le ka zo'e xendo zo'e zo'e}) is a quality.
> >
> > Properties are properties of something; qualities are in and of
> > themselves.
>
>This sounds like a metaphysical distinction that, like all of them,
>doesn't actually refer to anything in reality, but is an artifact of our
>concepts.
>
>Dogness, a property or a quality? Fiveness? There can't be any instance of
>a quality existing outside of an observable.

As I understand it, calling it a "property" under the above definition 
means precisely that you are focusing on one (or a couple) of places in the 
bridi. You are thinking of things, objects. Nora and I are of the school 
that tends to see Lojban bridi as more verblike - to stress the 
relationship or process or state of being in a bridi relationship, and to 
look at the strands that define that relationship. Thus, a "quality" of 
dogness is a tie between dog and species, and I start to thing of that 
individual on one hand, and all the other dogs of that species in the 
other, and what about that dog makes it a part of that species, and why 
that species includes this particular dog which may or make not be a 
typical member of that species. While "dogness" as a quality doesn't seem 
particularly useful (unless maybe you are a breeder), "humanity/humanness" 
does . It seems trite to speak of an individual's "humanity" which would 
be "lo ka ce'u remna". But when we talk about that which transcends race, 
creed, and nationality, we get something more abstract and not tied to the 
individual filling x1 of remna.

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org