Re: Mu

[Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>]

> But it is still presuppositionless (well, free of the
> presupposition about the existence of unicorns anyhow).

My knee-jerk reaction to an statement, in English, about unicorns is to say
that there is no such thing as unicorns.  I do not even consider it further
and say that it is false.  It seems counter-intuitive in a natural language to
talk about things which do not exist.

However, in maths, it is a totally story.  I am perfectly satisfied that

    Ax: xe{} & false (x)

    "For all x, such that x is a member of the empty set and the predicate of
    false of x is true."  (The predicate false () is false for any argument).

is true and provable.

Does lojban adopt the maths convention and allow such assertions to be true?  I
think my head will start to hurt if this happens ;-)

co'o mi'e dn.