From thinkit8@lycos.com Wed Sep 26 19:55:30 2001
Return-Path: <thinkit8@lycos.com>
X-Sender: thinkit8@lycos.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 27 Sep 2001 02:54:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 60301 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2001 02:54:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by 10.1.1.221 with QMQP; 27 Sep 2001 02:54:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n24.groups.yahoo.com) (10.1.2.111)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Sep 2001 02:55:30 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: thinkit8@lycos.com
Received: from [10.1.10.96] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 27 Sep 2001 02:55:30 -0000
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 02:55:26 -0000
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: more about ce'u and functions
Message-ID: <9ou4eu+st63@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <F90FFFj4W8itEwO2j8K000096ba@hotmail.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1655
X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster
X-Originating-IP: 24.4.254.136
From: thinkit8@lycos.com

--- In lojban@y..., "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@h...> wrote:
> 
> Let's consider two predicates, broda and brode, with the
> same extensions but different intensions, i.e. two different
> predicates such that {roda rode zo'u go da de broda gi da de brode}.
> 
> Now hopefully we will all agree that {le du'u ko'a broda ko'e}
> and {le du'u ko'a brode ko'e} are two different propositions
> (which happen to have the same truth value), with different
> meaning. On the other hand, {le broda be ko'e} and
> {le brode be ko'e} both have the same referent (namely ko'a,
> if {ko'a broda ko'e}).
> 
> Now then, {le du'u makau broda ce'u} and {le du'u makau brode ce'u}
> are different functions into propositions: they each give a 
different
> proposition for any given value of ce'u.
> 
> What about {le broda be ce'u} and {le brode be ce'u}, assuming
> this is a valid way of using {ce'u} (I don't think it is, but
> for the sake of argument)? Both give the same values for any given
> value of ce'u. Do the two expressions refer to the same function,
> the way that both {le broda} and {le brode} refer to the same
> object?
> 
> If they both refer to the same function, then this is clearly
> not what we normally want as a te frica, since what we want
> there is the intension, not the extension.
> 
> If they refer to different functions, this is a further violation
> of the usual meaning of {le}, which is normally extensional.
> 
> mu'o mi'e xorxes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

.oiro'e la'edi'u traji pluja .i .au kelci