Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 22:23:13 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199801120323.WAA17107@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Sender: Lojban list From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Subject: Re: knowledge and belief X-To: lojban To: John Cowan X-UIDL: 58845a5a7fd6e4629744f93e076454f3 Status: RO X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1663 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jan 12 15:58:15 1998 X-From-Space-Address: - >> Jorge suggests that the x4 place is superfluous; > >Jorge? Is that really what you're suggesting? If so, >I disagree. How can anyone know anything except by some >epistemology? There seems to be some confusion as to what is an epistemology. In some examples, it seems to be taken as the way by which something gets to be known. In other cases it is the theory or lore within which something is a fact. For example: le du'u li re sumji li pa li pa cu jetnu le cmaci That one plus one is two is true in mathematics. la djan djuno le du'u li re sumji li pa li pa kei fo le cmaci John knows that 1+1=2 in mathematics. la djin toldjuno le du'u li re sumji li pa li pa kei fo le cmaci Gene ignores that 1+1=2 in mathematics. Obviously in those examples the epistemology has nothing to do with how John came to the knowledge or why Gene came to be ignorant of that fact. The epistemology has to do with the realm within which the fact is true, not with the method by which the knower came to know it. That's why I'm confused by "epistemologies" that only say how the knower came across the fact. co'o mi'e xorxes > >> I am trying to figure out what it tells us about the word; >> lojbab suggests that le nu visku or similar "epistemologies" >> will suffice. > >My position is closer to lojbab's. Indeed, when I suggested >that a schema might belong in the x4 place, I didn't mean to >say that schema belongs there _Instead_ of epistemology; I >meant to suggest that a schema might be one of many acceptable >epistemologies that could be used as {le ve djuno}. > >co'omi'e markl. >