Subject: Re: [lojban] Retraction, Part 1

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:13:37 -0400

And Rosta wrote:

> #Russell's example: \iota x (x wrote _Waverly_) means "the (unique)
> #author of _Waverly_" and refers to Walter Scott.
> 
> Strictly speaking I wouldn't use {tu'o} here, because the referent
> of {x: x wrote _Waverly_} can vary across possible worlds.

If it didn't, iota would be useless. It is silly to speak of
\iota x (x + x), because it is equivalent to just x + x.
But if \iota x (x wrote _Waverly_) meant "Walter Scott", then
"Walter Scott is the author of _Waverley_" and "Walter Scott is Walter
Scott" would be equivalent in meaning, which they plainly are not.

I should have said before that if x such that p(x) is not unique,
then \iota x p(x) does not refer, the same as if there is no such x.
The nearest Lojban equivalent is "lo pa".
-- 
Not to perambulate || John Cowan <[email-masked]>
the corridors || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
in the boots of ascension. \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel