Subject: Re: [lojban] Question, direct, indirect and spurious (was Lojban Tautologies ...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 21:37:21 EST

In a message dated 2/13/2002 6:40:07 PM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> than {ro da zo'u ganai da jdima ta gi mi te vecnu ta} -- 
> >a
> >much clearer or less controversial form.
> 
> That only works with the intended meaning if it applies to all
> worlds, not just the real one. As a statement about the real
> world, it does not say what I would do if the price were other
> than what it is in this world. Something that "whatever the price"
> does say.
> 

Well, if the price is not something in this world, then it cannot be the 
price in this world, so that is not a problem. If you want transworld claims 
(and it is not clear that that is what the "may" amounts to) then you can set 
this into a transworld context -- as soon as we have some solid agreement 
about how to do that. Nor is it clear that a coherent version of your 
strange creation would solve the problem, for what beyond this world is going 
to count as a reasonable answer to the question?

On the other hand, it is hard to see what move across worlds will add. 
Something from another world, if describable in Lojban, is a perfectly good 
instatiation here. To be sure, such a critter could not be an invalidating 
case -- one where it was the price and yet I would not buy -- in the {ganai} 
form. But it could be in the {va'o} form which probably the easiest and 
surest transworld format.