From pycyn@aol.com Fri Apr 20 14:04:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 20 Apr 2001 21:04:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 68715 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r14.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.68) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.9.) id r.fe.528e9c3 (4340) for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:38 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Entail, Implicate (was: not only To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6737 --part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/20/2001 12:55:03 PM Central Daylight Time, xod@sixgirls.org writes: > Does anybody who needs to ask what "entail" means understand "classic > bivalent first order logic", "alethic modalities", "S5", or "deontic > modalities"? I hope I don't need all this to be able to think clearly or > use Lojban effectively. > > > I gather that "entail" refers to logical deduction (nibli), and > No, but you wanted to play in the meta-game. There you do have to-- if not know these guys -- at least know what they are about and where to get the details if they become important. They are all easy to come by (people keep touting McCawley, for example), but they take a little time. In general, I'd suggest using the time to write better Lojban; there are enough of us meta-players already. Implicature is not inductive (in any of the senses of that word and certainly not in one that could be called {tolsucta}), it is deductive from a fairly vague set of premises -- closer to legal or casuistical reasoning than scientific or statistical. --part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/20/2001 12:55:03 PM Central Daylight Time,
xod@sixgirls.org writes:


Does anybody who needs to ask what "entail" means understand "classic
bivalent first order logic", "alethic modalities", "S5", or "deontic
modalities"? I hope I don't need all this to be able to think clearly or
use Lojban effectively.


I gather that "entail" refers to logical deduction (nibli), and
"implicate" refers to induction (tolsucta)?


No, but you wanted to play in the meta-game.  There you do have to-- if not
know these guys -- at least know what they are about and where to get the
details if they become important.  They are all easy to come by (people keep
touting McCawley, for example), but they take a little time.  In general, I'd
suggest using the time to write better Lojban; there are enough of us
meta-players already.

Implicature is not inductive (in any of the senses of that word and certainly
not in one that could be called {tolsucta}), it is deductive from a fairly
vague set of premises -- closer to legal or casuistical reasoning than
scientific or statistical. --part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary--