Re: virus: SM

David McFadzean (david@lucifer.com)
Sun, 28 Sep 1997 12:43:25 -0600

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: David McFadzean: "Re: virus: Social Metaphysics"
Previous message: Brett Lane Robertson: "re:virus:sm"
Maybe in reply to: Reed Konsler: "virus: SM"
Next in thread: Marie Foster: "Re: virus: SM"

At 01:50 PM 9/27/97 -0700, Tim Rhodes wrote:
>BING! (sound of lightbulb going on)
>
>I see--if all descendents have a common ancestor, then all ancestors have
>common descendants, because the only isosemantic "ancestor" will be the
>one from which a descendants are... well,... descended.

I don't think so. If all humans have a common ancestor, then the reciprocal
relation is only that the one common ancestor has all humans as his or her
descendants. You can't infer anything about all ancestors from the original
statement. (X is an ancestor of Y iff X appears in Y's genetic lineage.)

--
David McFadzean                 david@lucifer.com
Memetic Engineer                http://www.lucifer.com/~david/
Church of Virus                 http://www.lucifer.com/virus/

Next message: David McFadzean: "Re: virus: Social Metaphysics"
Previous message: Brett Lane Robertson: "re:virus:sm"
Maybe in reply to: Reed Konsler: "virus: SM"
Next in thread: Marie Foster: "Re: virus: SM"