[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 02:12:10AM -0000, And Rosta wrote: > > xod: > [...] > > > I think that loi cipni has a billion wings, but Mr. Bird only has 2 > > > > Me too. So even though Nick is frustrated by the disagreement, there's > > also a lot of agreement going on. > > I don't see why numbers of things should be special compared to > other things for masses. If we can say things like "loi gerku cu > jmive gi'e morsi" we should also be able to say "loi gerku cu se > tuple vo da gi'e se tuple so'i da". > > So I guess I agree with Nick on that. Masses are groups of individuals taken collectively. It is possible that they obey weird and contradictory laws, but I don't know anyone who would say The Beatles had 2 legs *as a mass*. Is Lojban mass so different? Would it be useful at all, or different from Lojban individuals, if we could make that claim? It is possible that certain properties are additive and others are not. Legs are additive, lives can be, but in the way they are being discussed here by Jorge, I think they are not. If the question is "how many dogs are alive", and the mass of dogs contains 9 dogs, we can't honestly answer "1" because each dog is alive. Or "alive, and dead" because there's a 10th dead dog lying on the ground. That's taking lives additively; Jorge may correctly argue that the phrase "jmive gi'e morsi" is not counting lives, but discussing the livingness of the whole mass. But killing one dog of 10 doesn't kill the pack. I think the pack is no more when enough dogs are slaughtered so that the remaining ones scatter *as individuals*, and no longer as a (semi-coordinated) body. So, I don't think the mass takes on characteristics of the individuals willy-nilly, but refers to the synergetic, emergent properties of the group. Since each of the fellows can't carry the piano alone, are we then justified in claiming that their mass can't carry the piano either? When there is a contradiction between the characteristics of one or every individual, and the characteristic of the mass taken as a mass, surely the mass characteristics are correct and the others are wrong. To make lojban mass the union of the actual mass and the individuals is destructive, and beyond the intention of the designers, and can't help us real jboka'e either. It can't be defended by formalism or naturalism, but only the understandable desire to shoehorn a solution into a hasty compromise after an argument that's super-za'o. -- jipno se kerlo re mei re mei degji kakne