From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Mar 28 04:24:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 28 Mar 2001 12:24:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 15567 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2001 12:24:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Mar 2001 12:24:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta3 with SMTP; 28 Mar 2001 13:25:51 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Wed, 28 Mar 2001 13:07:01 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 28 Mar 2001 13:25:19 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 13:24:59 +0100 To: lojbab , lojban Subject: djuno: the key issue (was: Re: Fwd: Re: [lojban] Random lojban questions/annoyances.) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6274 Lojbab: #At 06:52 PM 03/27/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote: #>Lojbab: #>At 05:00 PM 03/26/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote: #>[....] #>#>Whether this means that *I* can truthfully say "ko'a djuno fe homosexua= lity- #>#>is-a-sin fo fundamentalist-jegvo-dogma", I'm not sure. I suppose the an= swer #>#>is Yes. #># #>#It seems key to me that ANYONE should be able to say that truthfully if #>#indeed ko'a is satisfied with the dogma as a means of establishing truth= . #> #>Hmm. So we haven't resolved this after all. If I don't accept that the #>ve djuno entails the se djuno, but the x1 does believe that the #>ve djuno entails the se djuno, then according to you I can honestly #>describe this by DJUNO.=20 [...] #The difference to me between djuno and jinvi is in the x1s attitude toward= s=20 #the x2. If I jinvi something, I am admitting subjectivity and indeed the= =20 #possibility of error as to whether x2 is indeed true or whether x2 is=20 #justified by x4. When I claim to know/djuno something by epistemology x4,= =20 #I am not admitting that I could reach any other truth by that veldjuno. It seems to me that the discussion has converged on just two rival definitions that differ on one point: for "x1 djuno x2 x3 x4" to be true, does x2 have to be entailed by x4 (Position I), or is it sufficient for x1= =20 to believe (possibly erroneously) that x1 is entailed by x4 (Position II)? Lojbab says (II), and (II) is what I would advocate too. But I think (I) is closer to established usage and also to the views of the Three Magi (pc, John & Jorge). --And.