Date:  Fri, 2 Jan 1998 14:45:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199801021945.OAA08825@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: Knowledge & Belief
X-To:         sbelknap@UIC.EDU
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 735
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jan  2 14:45:51 1998
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.

You have not heard of deduction from actions, empathy, etc.  These are all
valid as epistemologies for some people for some kinds of knolwedge.
You cannot consider the meaning of djuno without that epistemology
place, nor cannot you limit its meaning to only the most "logical" of
epistemologies.

lojbab