Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:37:44 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199801271737.MAA13214@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Rob Zook Sender: Lojban list From: Rob Zook Subject: Re: Summary so far on DJUNO X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <199801271557.HAA22113@gateway.informix.com> X-UIDL: b8fb22219b67337ff8749909cc23b7ce X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jan 28 09:36:44 1998 X-From-Space-Address: - At 04:08 PM 1/27/98 GMT+0, Rob Zook wrote: > >My intention was to clarify. We agree what believing is, and part >of knowing involves believing. So why not call that part of >knowing "believing", since that's what it is? We just imphesizing different "aspects" of the meaning of "know". In this case, given all the confusion, I think that emphesizing the belief part over the know part adds to the confusion, rather than resolving it. >Before I continue, let me note that I have come round to the view >that x4 should indeed be an epistemology place, mainly because >that's what the baseline says. I object to the substatution of metaphysics for epistemology for that reason also, apart from the fact it seems to make no sense. >> Epistemology - "the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of >> knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity" >> >> That seems like exactly what the x4 represents, the grounds for >> someones claim of knowledge. > >But that's not what John and Jorge thought the x4 was. > >> Metaphysics means "the system of principles underlying a particular >> study or subject". More inclusive, while epistemology refers >> _specifically_ to that which underlies knowledge. > >And this pretty much is what John and Jorge thought the x4 was. And what seems irrelavent to djuno. Rob Z. -------------------------------------------------------- Were it offered to my choice, I should have no objection to a repetition of the same life from its beginning, only asking the advantages authors have in a second edition to correct some faults in the first. -- Ben Franklin