Re: logical issues (lambda,ka, man-dogs, etc.)

mi joi la .and. cusku be di'e casnu

> > Poof.  In fact, "mi se cmene zo xorxes" became true only when you joined
> > the Lojban community.
> 
> No. I vociferously dispute that. "koa se cmene zo xorxes" is an eternal
> truth, *every* truth being eternal.

You are correct.  However, it is true that there was a "co'a" point for
his being called "la xorxes.", and before that he was not so called.
This does not mean, of course, that statements about him before that point
are false if they use the designator "la xorxes.", since that designator
rigidly refers to him.

> > To think otherwise is a residue of essentialism.
> 
> What's essentialism?

In brief, the view that things are characterized by certain properties
which are essential -- they could not have been otherwise; they constitute
the essence of the thing.  Such properties are also (weirdly, IMHO) called
"internal".  For example, it is usually considered an essential property
of a table that it is made of a particular piece of wood -- if it had not
been, it would have been a different table altogether.  Likewise, essential
properties of a person are his/her parents -- different parent, different
person.  It is even an essential property of the Queen that she has not
always been a swan (I have seen this example in a technical article by
Saul Kripke!).

Lojban is generally opposed to essences, but can resuscitate them by
using "ka".

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@ccil.org
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.