From ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK  Sat Mar  6 22:45:10 2010
Date:         Fri, 26 May 1995 01:24:09 +0100
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: [forwarded message]
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
X-From-Space-Date: 
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Message-ID: <zhrjj1Ka_XB.A.JzE.2t0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

John:
> la stivn. belnap. cusku di'e
> > No ones skin is Platonic ideal blue, but is blue to a degree. Its seems
> > artificial to specify that something is 89% blue. A fuzzy means of
> > describing the degree of blueness would be most interesting. Has anyone
> > thought about this?
> That is supposed to be "le jei le skapi be ko'a cu blanu", the degree-of-truth> of someone's skin being blue.  As far as "ni" goes, I'm as much at sea as
> anyone.

I suspected that, but was unsure.  If truth is gradient, then is false a
truth value of 0, and true a value of more than 0?

I wonder whether {lo jei carmi gusni} is different from {lo ni carmi
gusni}.  Perhaps there is an upper limit on {lo jei c g} (e.g. a value
of 1), but no upper limit on {lo ni carmi gusni} (allowing for infinite
brightness).  What do you reckon?
---
And