From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Jan 28 18:10:59 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:10:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NagK2-0004xR-LK for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:10:59 -0800 Received: from mail-fx0-f209.google.com ([209.85.220.209]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NagJu-0004sL-UN for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:10:56 -0800 Received: by fxm1 with SMTP id 1so100781fxm.4 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:10:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=/IADuOf+cO7FOdPwDUUd6NwDV3Q36vRe25B0vbIBzQY=; b=fCSY38Cfr62d/E2taSW70ivAHaAF4XZN14v+ff+5RS8z/eEFdBmFwzX9o0oNIvUi55 Nvuw1uoiCZ32gV6E8EwiD0I16wJYhkX9yqzjmqqiGIWLGnb0LZOD8d46SgZliBYijZ3e IrTGMQOKzBi/0DrwrXZqkFiFNmitgEt1i8VaM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=pQ/Bc2+xtb+ZOTZAaebu17zHxZ3ZDgnF2XyUth8INT+HUl5Y3xDeeIBWfiRtaYpjq9 i6xxrmyzJ46RR7tHr4f4mID2KSEokYtKM3krvdnPQ7Z3JRVPu5lQoreun1EI4+KfBIcG QtT8wA7JsHHmf3XXJVRObgiHn5mylbOefhgCU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.187.211 with SMTP id m19mr25860hbh.10.1264731044075; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:10:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <12d58c161001281807p7132ea49r8258d1dbf920bcd1@mail.gmail.com> References: <7177e42e1001271849o782ec540td05bdd005d247b09@mail.gmail.com> <925d17561001280503u5fcaeca8ue13039a5f6ae5b2b@mail.gmail.com> <12d58c161001281807p7132ea49r8258d1dbf920bcd1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:10:43 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 298af87e53e834d4 Message-ID: <12d58c161001281810t7bea69c3o7db8963471745723@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: "Why should I believe that?" From: "komfo,amonan" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f7c3009e57ac047e442400 X-archive-position: 2760 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: komfoamonan@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners --001485f7c3009e57ac047e442400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM, komfo,amonan wrote= : > 2010/1/28 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas > >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:49 PM, DataPacRat >> wrote: >> >> >The most >> > relevant lujvo or gismu I can find dealing with belief is krici, which >> > is belief /without/ evidence or proof, the exact opposite of the sort >> > of belief I want to deal with. >> >> No, "krici" is not necessarily belief without evidence. The >> "[regardless of evidence/proof]" comment in the definition only says >> that evidence/proof is not part of the "krici" concept, "krici" just >> relates the believer and their belief, without saying anything about >> how the believer came to that belief, what led them to that belief. >> >> The comment is something of a "don't think of a pink elephant" >> distractor. Instead of distancing "krici" from the concept of >> evidence, it leads people to think that "krici" is for beliefs without >> evidence. >> >> But it is of course perfectly legitimate to ask for reasons (krinu) >> for believeing (krici) something. >> > > There is a discrepancy between the definitions of {krici} in jbovlaste & > the gismu wordlist. In the latter, it specifically states "without > evidence/proof". Here's the link < > http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/gismu.txt >. Does anyone kno= w > whether that is out of date and/or whether jbovlaste is, when in doubt, t= he > higher authority? > Either way, your point stands, because it's merely a comment; nonetheless the discrepancy surprised me, & indicates the possibility of other, more salient discrepancies. mu'o mi'e komfn --001485f7c3009e57ac047e442400 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com> wrot= e:
2010/1/28 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:49 PM, DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com> wrote:

>The most
> relevant lujvo or gismu I can find dealing with belief is krici, which=
> is belief /without/ evidence or proof, the exact opposite of the sort<= br> > of belief I want to deal with.

No, "krici" is not necessarily belief without evidence. The=
"[regardless of evidence/proof]" comment in the definition only s= ays
that evidence/proof is not part of the "krici" concept, "kri= ci" just
relates the believer and their belief, without saying anything about
how the believer came to that belief, what led them to that belief.

The comment is something of a "don't think of a pink elephant"= ;
distractor. Instead of distancing "krici" from the concept of
evidence, it leads people to think that "krici" is for beliefs wi= thout
evidence.

But it is of course perfectly legitimate to ask for reasons (krinu)
for believeing (krici) something.

There is a= discrepancy between the definitions of {krici} in jbovlaste & the gism= u wordlist. In the latter, it specifically states "without evidence/pr= oof". Here's the link < http://www.lojban.org/publica= tions/wordlists/gismu.txt >. Does anyone know whether that is out of= date and/or whether jbovlaste is, when in doubt, the higher authority?

Either way, your point stands, because it= 's merely a comment; nonetheless the discrepancy surprised me, & in= dicates the possibility of other, more salient discrepancies. mu'o mi&#= 39;e komfn
--001485f7c3009e57ac047e442400--