Date:  Wed, 14 Jan 1998 18:13:25 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199801142313.SAA27090@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: knowledge and belief
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: 1b29548843e88f6aa6fffa7aa3c39efe
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 726
X-From-Space-Date: Thu Jan 15 12:50:06 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

Lojbab:

>>>  It ain't what you don't know that worries me;
>>>  it's what you do know that ain't so.
 >>
>>That's an indirect question.
>
>I disagree.  These are
>ledo na/na'e se djuno
>and ledo se djuno

You're right. Chris pointed that out as well. I take it that
you agree with the rest of my comments, since this is the
only one you objected?

It's interesting that in both examples where presupposition
of truth breaks down, "everything you know is wrong" and
"what you know that ain't so", the fact known is not made
explicit. Also, they could be reworded as "everything you
think you know is wrong" and "what you think you know
that ain't so", losing in snappiness but making the meaning
more clear.

co'o mi'e xorxes