Return-Path: Message-Id: Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 00:43 EDT From: lojbab (Bob LeChevalier) To: lojban-list Subject: identity and general semantics Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jun 14 00:43:52 1991 X-From-Space-Address: lojbab 1. general semantics is an approach, and not a well accepted one (Martin Gardner has torn it to shreds, I believe). We did not and will not embed it as a mandatory underpinning of Lojban. There is room in the language for different theories of language and identity. You are not obligated to use 'du' and unlike English 'is', you can avoid its use, if your beliefs forbid it. 2. When we talk about identity assertions we are not really talking about the same thing general semantics does anyway. We are saying that two names descriptions or whatever have the same referent. I certainly have the right to call you eric now, and then in the next sentence just say "you". It is a kind of identity sentence to say that "do" and "la erik." are the same referent, and that you can substitute one for the other in any sentence within th ediscourse and it does not change the sentence. We make no claim however that the you who reads this sentence is the same you as the one who read the first sentence of this posting. Frankly, I don't care, so long as something that answers to eric and has the appropriate memories and understandings to know what I am talking about, reads this, and believes that heis/you are being addressed. In short, g.s. is for philosophers, not for me. lojbab