From pycyn@aol.com Thu Sep 13 05:24:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 13 Sep 2001 12:24:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 25347 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 12:23:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2001 12:23:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m04.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.7) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2001 12:23:59 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id r.102.8cb607c (2614) for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:23:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <102.8cb607c.28d1ff36@aol.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:23:18 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Better "hardliner" definition (was: A revised ce'u proposal invo... To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_102.8cb607c.28d1ff36_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_102.8cb607c.28d1ff36_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/12/2001 10:36:47 PM Central Daylight Time, xod@sixgirls.org writes: > Why did JCB choose to bother developing a Logical Language in order to > test SW? We feel the effects of the contradiction between these two goals. > Actually, he picked first order logic as the basis of his language because he thought (he could be pretty unobservant at times) that it was as metaphysics free as a language could be. That is, for him the two goals went together (he had a limited view of what "logical language" meant). --part1_102.8cb607c.28d1ff36_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/12/2001 10:36:47 PM Central Daylight Time,
xod@sixgirls.org writes:


Why did JCB choose to bother developing a Logical Language in order to
test SW? We feel the effects of the contradiction between these two goals.


Actually, he picked first order logic as the basis of his language because he
thought (he could be pretty unobservant at times) that it was as metaphysics
free as a language could be.  That is, for him the two goals went together
(he had a limited view of what "logical language" meant). --part1_102.8cb607c.28d1ff36_boundary--