[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 12:20:53PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> Jordan:
> > On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 04:08:10PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > > su'u...kamse'i is not supposed to return the person, but the identity of
> > > the person. If it returns the person, it's useless! My self-ness is my
> > > uniqueness, but it's not me. I have hair, my self-ness doesn't
> >
> > I see; So I was confused over what you mean by identity (I was
> > thinking in the math sense where the identity just returns itself
> > (1 * 4 = 4, etc))
> >
> > So; what *is* the identity of something, if not the thing itself?
> > In some logics it is viewed as the class containing only that thing,
> > but I don't think that works here..
>
> I now understand that xod is talking about a haecceity -- the
> properties that make an individual that indidividual and not some
> other individual. One way to model this is indeed as the class
> containing only that thing, so long as the class is defined
> intensionally.
>
> I don't think we really need a NU for this, but it's how I choose
> to interpret {me}. So {me lai xod} = "has the properties that
> make something xod and not any other individual", "xoddity".
If you're speaking individuals, you should've used "la". "lai" is
almost useless, because if I name a mass and then refer to it, the
mass itself is still a single individual. "lai xod" means the mass
of things named xod---but there's only one...
{me la xod} still doesn't work for what xod wants, anyway, afaict.
> > "ka ce'u xunre kei be mi" is precisely the same as "du'u mi xunre" because
> > you reduced the lambda variable. (it is (\x: xunre(x))[mi] == xunre(mi))
>
> I don't think {du'u mi xunre} is the same as {mi xunre} or
> {mi poi'i ke'a xunre}. So if {ka ce'u xunre mi} means {du'u mi
> xunre} (and I can see why you think it would), then ka with x2+
> won't replace poi'i.
[ I assume you meant {ka ce'u xunre kei be mi} ]
This is the whole point of a lambda expression... If it doesn't
reduce like it should, what are the additional places supposed to
do?
It can still replace poi'i, because it doesn't become a du'u
if you don't fill all the free variables.
le se ka xunre
is the same as
le xunre
and
mi se ka xunre
is equivalent to
mi xunre
[...]
> > [1] even in fuzzy logics this has nothing to do with anything. My
> > understanding is that a logic with infinite truth values ranging
> > 0-1 considers the value of the expression to be a measure of our
> > certainty of its truth (or whatever). It has nothing to do with
> > whether the thing is 10lumens brighter or whatever. (I have no
> > idea how much a lumen is, btw)
>
> These matters were thoroughly thrashed out a couple of months ago,
> and although I don't think we agreed on a disambiguation of ni,
> we did agree that, roughly speaking, a jei scale can be projected
> from a ni scale, or that in some ways the two scales can be seen
> as two ways of measuring/categorizing the same thing.
What do you mean by a disambiguation? I contend that {jei} can be
defined in terms of {ni} using ni2, and that anyone using it to
indicate degree or scale of something other than truth is using it
incorrectly.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binjZ_jlTwI8f.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped