Date:  Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:47:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712312047.PAA11451@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: Steven Belknap <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Steven Belknap <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Knowledge & Belief
X-To:         "=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas=22?="
              <jorge@intermedia.com.ar>
X-cc:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  <U16081.820415602@UICVM>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 1210
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Dec 31 15:47:58 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

>We really do use "know" differently then.

We use the English word "know" in similar ways. I acknowledge that the
symantic space covered by "know" includes knowing what someone knows. I am
suggesting that the lojban word <djuno> has only one meaning, and that
meaning refers to an internal state. The internal state does not have
access to the internal state of others except through assertions or
physical indications.

>
>><la stivn djuno le du'u la xorxes xusra le du'u la lojbab klama le zarci
>>kei fo da>
>>
>>"Steven knows that Jorge asserts that Lojbab goes to the store."
>>
>>This statement might be true, if Jorge has made such an assertion.
>
>But you are the only person that can know that it is true? So {djuno}
>can only be used truthfully in the first person? That's not how it has
>been used, and that's not how "know" is used in English.
>
<Djuno> can be used in many ways, not just in the first person.

 The meaning of the English word "know" can not be isomorphically mapped to
one lojban word, because lojban has only one definition for each predicate.


Steven Belknap, M.D.
Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria