David Kastrup wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bent C Dalager) writes: > >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bent C Dalager) writes: >>> >>> Not as much "been" liberated, but "turned" liberated. >> I expect that either way you split this hair, using "free" in the >> sense of "possessing liberty" is still going to be quite reasonable. >> >>> But picking just a single word from a whole explanation of _one_ >>> naming and declaring it as equivalent is not really being careful with >>> language at all. >> I have never claimed equivalence. What I have made claims about are >> the properties of one of the meanings of a word. Specifically, my >> claim is that "free" is a reasonable description of some one or some >> thing that has been "liberated". > > But it suggests that the natural state would be the unfree state. > Which for Africans in colonial America it was. They arrived unfree and many of them liver their entire lives in slavery. After liberation they were. nevertheless, often referred to as "freed", because someone (thier owner) had freed them. As freed men they were, of course, /free/ to do what they chose (as long as someone "white" didn't object).
Please stop splitting hairs and get down to some useful discussion. This is boring (and has nothing to do with either Python or the subject line except in the most inconsequential way). regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden Sorry, the dog ate my .sigline -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
