From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Mon Jun 12 17:08:45 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17259 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 00:08:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Jun 2000 00:08:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 00:08:43 -0000 Received: from calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA19827 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:09:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200006130009.UAA19827@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo In-Reply-To: Message from John Cowan of "Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:35:00 EDT." Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:09:02 -0400 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell John Cowan writes: >On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > >> If I read "lo " where foo translates to "the mother of >> God", I'm going to be pissed. It assumes that there is an objectively >> observable God _and_ that said God has a mother _and_ that it's the God >> you're talking about. > >Not at all. Since "lo " is the same as "da poi ", it simply >means that the speaker is asserting that something is a mother of God >along with whatever the bridi asserts. From your point of view, >statements about the mother of God are like statements about purple >rhinoceroses: uncontroversially false. Not really, but this isn't the place to explain my semi-humanist religious POV. :) >But there is no *assumption* here. Ah. Point taken, objection withdrawn. -Robin, who reserves the right to laugh, though. -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. ... stripped of our uniqueness as human beings by Darwin, exposed to our own inadequacies by Freud, ... Power -- "the ability to bring about our desires" -- is all that we have left. --- Michael Korda, _Power!_