Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 09:36:12 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712081436.JAA06287@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: truthvalues (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism) X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1165 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 8 09:36:13 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Bob: > > The truth value of a preoposition is a number, yes. But it ... > > does not have the properties of the common mathematical number > > sets ... It is not transitive, ... > > Being a bit nitpicky: > > The truth value isn't a number. If it was, then you could do all > that mathsy stuff with it. > > Yet more nitpickyness: the mathematician who taught me analysis > considered a value on a scale to be a number. A matter of definition. > A number on scale is one kind of number; there are other kinds, too, > like integers or reals. > > And there are different kinds of scale -- we discussed this last > year. Look up `certainty factor' for an example of another type > number on a scale that behaves differently than a truth value. I don't want to start a long thread on this, especially because since I wrote the above I have had doubts about it, but I do think your mathematician is stretching things a bit. Consider the scale of hue. If green is value on that scale, it would follow that green is a number. Maybe green really is a number for your maths teacher, but not according to the folk definition of number in my mind. --And