From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Fri Dec  8 06:24:21 1995
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Date: Fri Dec 8 06:24:21 1995
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: ma'i - a standard for standards
X-To:         hazel@TURING.CS.STEDWARDS.EDU
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
Message-ID: <_vHs2PRDxDI.A._EF.Ju0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

The answer specifically on colors is that there was no agreement as to what
makes a color defined to be a particular color - whether it was a standard,
or a comparison - whether it was subjective or objective.  The standard
place was used when we had definite reason to believe that the predicate
was subjective, and thus that there might be substantial inconsistency
among evaluators as to whether a statement was "true" or "false" UNLESS
you made reference to a standard.  When the standard place is necessary to
assign even the most basic meaning needed to evaluate truth, then the
standard place is "metaphysically necessary", which is the requirement for
inclusion in the place structure.

lojbab