From graywyvern@hotmail.com Thu Feb 22 17:39:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: graywyvern@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 23 Feb 2001 01:39:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 76901 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2001 01:39:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Feb 2001 01:39:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.236.162) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Feb 2001 01:39:18 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:39:17 -0800 Received: from 209.176.48.20 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:39:17 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.176.48.20] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:names and senses and possible world and ol' Uncle Tom Cobbley (wordy) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:39:17 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Feb 2001 01:39:17.0903 (UTC) FILETIME=[6FB259F0:01C09D39] From: "michael helsem" >From: pycyn@aol.com li'o >There is a thing, otherwise unspecified in and of itself. It has a >uniqueness, a distinctiveness, an >it-ness, a vishesha. CA'E PAMEI ZASTI FA DA POI NARCENBA SEVZI LE BRODA >The thing has a Logically Proper Name, a linguistic expression which >denotes (refers to) the thing and designates (has >as sense) its vishesha, but has no connotations. It consequently >denotes >this thing in every situation. (is a rigid designator). .IJE PAMEI ZASTI FA LE JETNU CMENE BE DA --sounds to me like a metaphorical extension, of what humans experience as their subjective selfhood, to things. (But this *itself* is a metaphor...) li'o >I take it that one rule of the possible-worlds game is that, the closer a >possible world is to the real one, the more descriptions cluster in the >alternate world as they do in the real .I STODI FA LE PARBI BE LE NI LE CUMKI MUNJE GOI KO'A CU SIMSA KO'E GOI LE ZASTI MUNJE KEI BEI LE NI LE SNUTI SE CKAJI BE KO'I GOI LE DACTI POI MINTU SE CMENE PEVI KO'A CU SIMSA LE SNUTI SE CKAJI BE KO'I PEVI KO'E --but i wonder: by what rationale is any object in LE ZASTI MUNJE deemed to correspond to another object in LE CUMKI MUNJE? Evidently because of our propensity to imagine when we have made a choice, everything else but that choice remains the same in this world, & presumably every other...thus obviating the need to rename everything as we go...but i think the things bearing these same names, are now different. As Carlyle said, "Story is linear, action is solid." li'o >The case of classes is rather similar, li'o Two things we use the same words for: that ad hoc mapping of creatures we found or found out about, to a single, static hierarchical grid of names; & the whole medieval development of Platonism, that wanted to discover a system of ontic priorities within the reconceptualization of words as self-existent super- natural entities. I think for the former, fu'ivla are more appropriate; for the latter, it would be best not to plug a lot of philosophical baggage into KLESI (or SIDBO!), but rather begin with (if possible) restating those premises in Lojban first, then developing a natively lojbanic way of relating the arguments that were used, without equating latin terms to lojban. Finally (alas), the alternate universe in which i was able to find an application of either of these usages to the subject of XARZA'I MUNJE was a universe without the manifold interruptions i've been having at the store here, since i began this response around 4 hours ago... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com