From xod@sixgirls.org Thu Sep 06 19:57:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 7 Sep 2001 02:57:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 99450 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:57:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Sep 2001 02:57:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 02:57:00 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.6/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f872v0D17612 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:57:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:56:59 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] ce'u In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, And Rosta wrote: > Adam: > > la .and. cusku di'e > > > > I suppose that's a possibility, but don't true facts exist as much > > as > > > > events which happen? Would you take that to "fatci", i.e. that > > there's > > > > no distinction between a ka'e fatci and a ca'a fatci? > > > > > > I see a distinction between these. > > > > What distinction? > > A fatci is something that is true of the local universe. A ka'e fatci > then is something that could be true of the local universe and a ca'a > fatci is something that actually is true of the local universe. > "X dies before X is born" is not a ka'e fatci. "I live in Paris" is > a ka'e but not a ca'a fatci. "I live in London" is a ka'e and a ca'a > fatci. You are treading on conceptually thin ice when you categorize falsehoods into possibles and impossibles. Such activity involves non-provable statements. ----- "We should destroy the Muslims' homes while leaving the Christians' homes alone." -- Rehavam Zeevi, Israeli Tourism Minister