Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 15:06:52 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199802252006.PAA24563@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: "Erik W. Cornilsen" Sender: Lojban list From: "Erik W. Cornilsen" Subject: Re: Truth-ambiguous djuno [was Re: Summary so far on DJUNO] X-To: Lojban List To: John Cowan X-UIDL: b64eaf27664af083cd52586eb6a8af65 X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-From-Space-Date: Wed Feb 25 15:35:59 1998 X-From-Space-Address: - For those of you who are concerned with what makes a statement true in lojban, the "truth-free" version of djuno (not that I'm proposing that it become *the* definition, or anything of the sort) would be true if x1 did not futz-up and produce an x2 which is not entailed by x4. P.S. The passage of time is also a problem with applying logic to real-world situations. The truth-less djuno doesn't suffer from discovering at some later date that the epistemology was flawed, as it isn't a requirement that the statement x2 be true in the first place. You can still say that the Ancient Greeks knew things by their epistemologies which modern epistemologies claim to be false. P.P.S. You could still add truth if you wanted. "la djan. djuno le jetydu'u ..." (I'm attempting to say true-statement), which would indicate that the speaker is asserting that x2 is true, or "jifydu'u" for falsity. "la djan. kricydjuno le du'u ...", would indicate that John believes x2 to be true. (Perhaps krici isn't the best choice for that, as it indicates no proof, but that may fit for some epistemologies). Other truth-relating words could also be used to express the x1's relations to the truth of x2, jinvi, krici, senpi, smadi, and sruma, for example. P.P.P.S. I'm frightened that my spell checker wanted to replace "krici" with "Kirk." -- Erik W. Cornilsen thanatos@dimensional.com