[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Universal Basic Semantic Structures

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:00:49 -0400
Message-id: <9060c617d1ec6719fb9c0a3a6a9b0fe8.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Fri, September 28, 2012 01:51, John F Sowa wrote:
> ...
> DF
>> But [Rom H] is claiming "a personís body is not a part of that person
>> in the relevant sense."    (01)

>> This depends upon what he means by "the relevant sense".    (02)

> The key phrase is "the relevant sense".  Consider the sentences,    (03)

>     1. Bob thinks that the sky is blue.    (04)

>     2. Bob's body thinks that the sky is blue.    (05)

>     3. Bob's brain thinks that the sky is blue.    (06)

> The first sentence is normal, but the other two are "weird".
> Nobody, except somebody "in the grip of a theory", would
> ever say anything like that.    (07)

Agreed.    (08)

> The point Rom was trying to make is that the word 'body' is not
> synonymous with 'person'.  Those words are never used in ways
> that are interchangeable.    (09)

Fine.  But Rom was discussing parthood, not whether they are
synonymous or interchangeable.  If he claimed that a body was
only a (proper) part of a person, that would mean that the concepts
were not synonymous or interchangeable.    (010)

> John    (011)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (012)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>