ears that relation to it.")
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; ;; ISSUE: If "has" is not characterized carefully this axiom could
&gt; &gt; ;; turn out to be trivial.  For example, most independent physical
&gt; &gt; ;; objects necessarily have parts.  But I believe physical objects
&gt; &gt; ;; per se are paradigms of independent (hence non-relative) objects
&gt; &gt; ;; for Sowa.  So the question is how to avoid the consequence that
&gt; &gt; ;; intuitively independent entities turn out to be relative.
&gt; &gt; ;; Qual