[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: [jboske] Nick on propositionalism &c. (was: RE: Digest



John:
> Robert LeChevalier scripsit:
> > A faster-than-light spaceship is not the same as a purple unicorn, so the 
> > quantifier on "lo" must exclude the empty set.  The set of 
> > faster-than-light spaceships is logically the same as the set of purple 
> > unicorns, but I am not sure if it is pragmatically the same 
> 
> The *sets* are the same, but the *property* (ka) of being a u 
> is not the same as the property of being a ftl-s 

The sets are the same only on one understanding of what lo'i and
le'i mean -- you take them to be extensionally defined, but my
inclination would be to take them to be intensionally defined.
Since it is easy to express the extensional sense by other means
-- da poi ro de go broda gi cmima da -- but hard to express the
intensional sense by other means (other than "x1 is intensional-set
defined by property x2"), I find the intensional definition
preferable.

--And.