From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Wed Sep 18 14:47:51 2002
Return-Path: <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 18 Sep 2002 21:47:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 53803 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2002 21:47:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Sep 2002 21:47:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-15.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.115)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Sep 2002 21:47:50 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-213.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.213])
  by mailbox-15.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D9E6218F2
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 23:47:47 +0200 (DST)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: I like chocolate
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:49:26 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMKENGGIAA.a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20020918153659.P1238@skunk.reutershealth.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

John:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 08:32:42PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> 
> > {lo ka'e pavyseljirna cu blabi} or else {lo su'o mu'ei pavyseljirna
> > cu blabi} is true (according to my beliefs). {lo ca'a pavysljirna
> > cu blabi} is false.
> 
> I read "lo ka'e pavyseljirna" as "something(s) which have the (innate)
> capability of being unicorns," and I don't think they exist either.
> If you want to talk of unicorns, I think you either move (implicitly or
> explicitly) into a world where there are unicorns simpliciter, or else
> you have to go meta and talk of concepts of unicorns, statements about
> unicorns, or whatever.

That's why I offered the {su'o mu'ei} alternative. There is inconsistency
in the definition of {ka'e} & co, between the "is capable of being"
and "in some possible world is". (Basically, the capability story is
the usual one, but the possible story is used when nu is involved.)

--And.

