From pycyn@aol.com Mon Apr 16 13:39:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 16 Apr 2001 20:39:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 51790 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2001 20:39:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Apr 2001 20:39:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r11.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.65) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Apr 2001 20:39:31 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r11.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.d.133f17b7 (2522) for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 16:39:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 16:39:09 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Q To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d.133f17b7.280cb26d_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6591 --part1_d.133f17b7.280cb26d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/16/2001 2:47:37 PM Central Daylight Time, jcowan@reutershealth.com writes: > > How about mi na djuno la'e le jei ti drani > > . Whoa! If the true value (Truth) has a referent, then so has Falsehood. Now, whether either of them does or not is another question (the universe and the null set, 1 and 0, a tautology and a contradiction -- which one doesn't matter because of the {le}). The problem is that whatever the referent, if there is one, may be, it won't help knowing about whether something is true or not. If the claim is false, the referent -- assuming it is a claim at all -- will be a false one and so unknowable. If it is true, it is unlikely to be about le nu ti drani in any interesting way -- and is likely to be something that you know whatever the truth value of the original claim is. --part1_d.133f17b7.280cb26d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/16/2001 2:47:37 PM Central Daylight Time,
jcowan@reutershealth.com writes:


> How about mi na djuno la'e le jei ti drani

That doesn't work, because the false value doesn't have a referent
.

Whoa!  If the true value (Truth) has a referent, then so has Falsehood.  Now,
whether either of them does or not is another question (the universe and the
null set, 1 and 0, a tautology and a contradiction -- which one doesn't
matter because of the {le}).  The problem is that whatever the referent, if
there is one, may be, it won't help knowing about whether something is true
or not.  If the claim is false, the referent -- assuming it is a claim at all
-- will be a false one and so unknowable.  If it is true, it is unlikely to
be about le nu ti drani in any interesting way -- and is likely to be
something that you know whatever the truth value of the original claim is.
--part1_d.133f17b7.280cb26d_boundary--