Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: Imaginary worlds (MORE VERBOSE)(but hoepfully cleaner)

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:55:17 -0500

At 09:54 AM 02/11/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>I really did try to get this to come over from Word in a readable way, but
>Word seems to have a strange idea of what "text" is. Herewith another
>version, hopefully cleaner -- next step is WordStar's ASCII.

Given the way it is coming across, it looks like it is presuming HTML and 
not text. It is in a formatted font (which is thus not plain text), and 
somewhere in the message was an "&quot".

I am not likely to follow the philosophical stuff that this thread in 
producing, especially given the volume. But can I ask one clarifying 
question? Regardless of whatever imaginary world you may be considering, 
when you express an utterance it is evaluated in only one world which may 
be real or imaginary, right? A given statement is either true or false, 
things exist or they do not exist. Right?

The problem with "imaginary worlds" is that merely posing them suggests to 
some people including myself, that the invocation of possible worlds 
invokes ALL possible worlds at once, so that therefore unicorns both exist 
and not exist at one time, and all truths dependent on the conditions and 
existences of the world are indeterminant (i.e. only logical 
contradictions are invalid).

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org