Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 17:13:59 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199802252213.RAA00645@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: Summary so far on DJUNO X-To: lojban To: John Cowan X-UIDL: 71d955e45a178f7a42d2ee3b2258e04f Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Mar 02 13:24:04 1998 X-From-Space-Address: - Someone wrote: >> The important point to note that it is not possible for the expressor to change >> the metaphysics of a simple statement. And and asked: >Could it be done with a BAI? the case tag would be "fi'o selje'u", right? Isn't it true that there's always an implied "fi'o selje'u zo'e" in every sentence: "with-metaphysics the-obvious"? But now I'm confused about something. Suppose I say: la selbarna cu mlatu fi'o selje'u my. Spot is a cat under metaphysics M Couldn't some clever wag ask "Under what metaphysics is it true that (Spot is a cat under metaphysics M)?" And isn't it that latter metaphysics that's *really* what we think governs the speaker's claim that the object of "know"is true for the speaker? Because, after all, the sentence: la .and. djuno ledu'u sy. maltu fi'o selje'u my. And "djuno" (that Spot is a cat under metaphysics M) doesn't imply that the speaker uses M to know that Spot is a cat; nor by Jorge's version of "djuno" does it imply the speaker thinks Spot is a cat -- in fact, I'm not sure it even implies that And believes Spot is a cat! Hmmm, am I right about that? I had thought that "Proposition BAI sumti" always entailed "Proposition", but now I'm not so sure... Chris