Date:  Wed, 18 Feb 1998 12:08:39 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199802181708.MAA07013@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: bob@rattlesnake.com
Subject:      Re: Summary of summaries on DJUNO
X-To:         LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  <6ED6C5731@mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk> (message from And Rosta on Tue,
              17 Feb 1998 15:07:51 GMT+0)
X-UIDL: 89e7023e1f3b1c68bded3468b70d5ad9
X-Mozilla-Status: 8013
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Feb 18 16:07:01 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

   2. Everyone else:
      {djuno} means "epistemology x4 convinces x1 that true proposition
                     x2 is true about x3"
                     = "x2 is true and epistemology x4 convinces x1 that
                     x2 is true about x3".

Cannot be as written, since {djuno} was not specified as being
absolute as was {fatci}.   Hence there must be an epistemology for `true'.

Must be:

    "epistemology x4 convinces x1 that <true by epistemology x5 proposition>
    x2 is true about x3"

    = "x2 is true by epistemology x5
    and epistemology x4 convinces x1 that
    x2 is true about x3".

And since {djuno} has only four places, the epistemology places are
presumably the same.

Hence:

    x2 is true by epistemology x4
    and epistemology x4 convinces x1 that
    x2 is true about x3

Which folds to the standard definition:

    x1 knows fact(s) x2 (du'u) about subject x3 by epistemology x4


As for claiming that an English sentence such as the following is
wrong:

    Alice does not like Bill, but Bill knows she does.

versus

    Alice does not like Bill, but Bill is convinced she does.

*Both* are correct in the appropriate circumstances, such as

    Alice's mental state has been manipulated by outside forces.
    Consequently, Alice does not like Bill, but Bill knows she does.


    Bill is subject to delusions;
    Alice does not like Bill, but Bill is convinced she does.


As for {fatci}: do remember it was specifically defined as lacking an
epistemological place as it is intended for discussions by people who
not only do not know how they came to understand but who have not
examined their process of learning.  As a practical matter, no one who
both has studied Lojban and who pays attention to this definition can
use {fatci} except in an ironical sense.


Incidentally, for your interest, I am including below the eleven
entries in the gismu list that come sequentially under `true'.

It is a nice series.

* true (assertion),
    x2 of: x1 (agent) asserts/claims/declares x2 (du'u) is true [can be used
    for epistemology of authority]
    /:/ [also: x1 states/says that/affirms/purports to know that x2]
    /=/ xusra (xus xu'a)
* true (both true),
    x2 and x3 of: x1 is a logical conjunction, stating that x2 (du'u) and x3
    (du'u) are both true
    /:/
    /=/ kanxe (kax)
* true (certainty),
    x2 of: x1 is certain/sure/positive/convinced that x2 is true
    /:/
    /=/ birti (bit)
* true (doubted to be),
    x2 of: x1 doubts/is dubious/doubtful/skeptical/questions that x2 (du'u)
    is true
    /:/ [also: x2 is doubtful/dubious/questionable (= selsenpi for
    reordered places)]
    /=/ senpi (sen)
* true (either or both true),
    x2 and x3 of: x1 is a logical alternation/disjunction, stating that x2
    (du'u) and/or x3 (du'u) is/are true
    /:/
    /=/ vlina
* true (epistemological truth),
    x1 (du'u) is true/truth by standard/epistemology/metaphysics x2
    /:/ [words usable for epistemology typically have a du'u place]
    /=/ jetnu (jet je'u)
* true (opined to be true),
    x2 of: x1 thinks/opines x2 [opinion] (du'u) is true about subject/issue
    x3 on grounds x4
    /:/ [words usable for epistemology typically have a du'u place]
    /=/ jinvi (jiv ji'i)
* true (true by agreement),
    x3 of: x1 [person] agrees with person(s)/position/side x2 that x3 (du'u)
    is true about matter x4
    /:/
    /=/ tugni (tug tu'i)
* true (true by assumption),
    x2 of: x1 assumes/supposes that x2 (du'u) is true about subject x3;
    [epistemology]
    /:/ [words usable for epistemology typically have a du'u place]
    /=/ sruma (ru'a)
* true (true by belief),
    x2 of: x1 believes [without objective/external evidence/proof] that
    belief/creed x2 (du'u) is true/assumed about subject x3
    /:/ [also gives credence, has conviction]
    /=/ krici (kri)
* true (true by guess),
    x2 of: x1 guesses/conjectures/surmises x2 (du'u) is true about subject
    x3; [epistemology]
    /:/ [also: x1 has a hunch that x2 is true; x1 imagines x2 is true;
    words usable for epistemology typically have a du'u place]
    /=/ smadi