From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri May 26 21:59:40 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3124 ; Fri, 26 May 95 21:59:38 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Fri, 26 May 95 19:12:57 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa17311; 26 May 95 20:12 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7777; Fri, 26 May 95 15:10:24 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9251; Fri, 26 May 1995 15:00:35 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 15:05:04 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: A Fuzzy Ship from Theseus X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9505262012.aa17311@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R Fuzzy logic always comes up with regard to {jei}, but I don't really understand of what use it is. Besides the trivial examples like: le jei ti blanu cu du li pibimu The extent of truth of "this is blue" is 0.85 which I suppose nobody would ever want to use, {jei} doesn't seem to be all that relevant to fuzzy usage. What could be useful would be a way of assigning some truth scale to what is being said, not to some quoted sentence. There are (at least) two ways to do this. One is to use tanru with {mutce}, {traji}, etc. You can't ask for more fuzziness than tanru. Another way is to use attitudinals, for instance the scale: ju'ocai absolute certainty ju'osai ju'o ju'oru'e weak certainty ju'ocu'i uncertainty ju'onai impossibility Adding that to a sentence is somewhat like giving it a fuzzy truth value. So I can say {ju'osai ti blanu} "This is ceratinly blue", or {ju'oru'e ti blanu} "This is blue, I suppose". But I don't see how {jei}, or {ni}, can be put to use for any of this. Jorge