[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
And Rosta scripsit:
> Similarly, the answer to whether a nonmale or nonwhite *could* be a
> US President determines whether Mr US P is a subkind of Mr White Male.
On what grounds?
> And compare with whether someone not born in the US could be president:
> I'd say that if the answer to that were Yes, then the nature of US P
> would be altered, and we'd be dealing with a different Kind.
So you hold that Mr. Subject-of-George-VI came to an end in 1947 and was
replaced by a new, distinct Mr. Subject-of-George-VI which no longer
included millions of Indian and Pakistani nationals?
> And the answer to whether a black swan would be a true swan would
> determine whether Mr Swan is a subkind of Mr White.
They are swans all right. The question is whether it would be wrong to
deny that Mr. Bluebird is a subkind of Mr. Blanu merely because some non-blue
bluebirds might be discovered eventually.
> And I would not accept that Mr Lojbanist is a subkind of Mr Anglophone,
Suppose that no non-anglophone Lojbanists ever came into existence. From
your seat in Milliways (the restaurant at the end of the universe), would
you then persist in your rejection?
--
John Cowan jcowan@hidden.email www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com
"If he has seen farther than others,
it is because he is standing on a stack of dwarves."
--Mike Champion, describing Tim Berners-Lee (adapted)