Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QnDqi-0000sO-DY; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:23 -0700 Received: by gxk3 with SMTP id 3sf6516613gxk.16 for ; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=j+yTmwXQhTB/5sw6vcSFwnHrSQStXBK5n4uiqqTjXDQ=; b=m2k2zFsKzgCAd3Qb/3403Pl+BB4878GgRF3qUhT55zbH9yHNJvY9pfsVZ+JIqGd2TU hz7pHprbJN7rh9FBRzzyjGvwV0oDtqP6oxTAa2fMmVoSRpDfkfuxURNZGDyILK7UtIag Mp0Cwm4vD43EcCMZiVx4GkHsNAFbkOPgJEHlI= Received: by 10.151.25.12 with SMTP id c12mr408187ybj.77.1312048871423; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:11 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.11.100 with SMTP id 76ls989862eew.0.gmail; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.7.217 with SMTP id e25mr87130ebe.20.1312048869403; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.7.217 with SMTP id e25mr87129ebe.20.1312048869371; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f48.google.com (mail-fx0-f48.google.com [209.85.161.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h4si336923fao.0.2011.07.30.11.01.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.48; Received: by mail-fx0-f48.google.com with SMTP id 7so3628380fxg.7 for ; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.131.213 with SMTP id y21mr717001bks.88.1312048869121; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.70.196 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:01:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 14:01:09 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Coining a lujvo: "evidence" From: ".arpis." To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174780e4c5a0a304a94d2eee Content-Length: 6350 --0015174780e4c5a0a304a94d2eee Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:37 AM, tijlan wrote: > On 28 July 2011 03:18, .arpis. wrote: > > I, personally, am a fan {au sai} of {facydatci} > > > > Data that's false isn't data, per se. > > You can have false data as working data. That's how fraud, delusion, > etc. are possible. > I'm tempted to continue differentiating "working data" (i.e. something that someone thinks to be data and thus true) and "data" (which must be either {lo jetnu} or {lo fatci}, I'm not sure which), but I am beginning to see how this can become problematic. > > Consider also this case: > A 'color-blind' person goi koha and a non-'color-blind' person goi > kohe are looking at an apple and an orange. Kohe says the two fruits > have different colors. Koha says they have the same color. Both koha > and kohe are truthfully reporting the sense data they each perceive of > the fruits. Koha's and kohe's datni represent relative facts. But > fatci1 is defined to be 'in the absolute'. Whose sense data should be > exclusively referred to as {facydatni}? In other words, whose datni > would you consider as being *not* of reality? > If "color" is an abstract notion based on perception (your blue vs. my blue), then {ge nai lo datni pe ko'a gi nai lo datni pe ko'e fatci} (could I have said {lo datni pe ge nai ko'a gi nai ko'e fatci}?) since neither is true in the absolute sense. If "color" is defined in terms of the wavelengths/frequencies of the photons bouncing off of the fruits, then kohe's statement is certainly not fatci and koha's statment is probably fatci, but koha can't know that just based on koha's observation. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. > > -- mu'o mi'e .arpis. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. --0015174780e4c5a0a304a94d2eee Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:37 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 28 July 2011 03:18, .arpis. <rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:
> I, personally, am a fan {au sai} of {facydatci}
>
> Data that's false isn't data, per se.

You can have false data as working data. That's how fraud, delusi= on,
etc. are possible.

I'm tempted to continue dif= ferentiating "working data" (i.e. something that someone thinks t= o be data and thus true) and "data" (which must be either {lo jet= nu} or {lo fatci}, I'm not sure which), but I am beginning to see how t= his can become problematic.

Consider also this case:
A 'color-blind' person goi koha and a non-'color-blind' per= son goi
kohe are looking at an apple and an orange. Kohe says the two fruits
have different colors. Koha says they have the same color. Both koha
and kohe are truthfully reporting the sense data they each perceive of
the fruits. Koha's and kohe's datni represent relative facts. But fatci1 is defined to be 'in the absolute'. Whose sense data should = be
exclusively referred to as {facydatni}? In other words, whose datni
would you consider as being *not* of reality?

If &= quot;color" is an abstract notion based on perception (your blue vs. m= y blue), then {ge nai lo datni pe ko'a gi nai lo datni pe ko'e fatc= i} (could I have said {lo datni pe ge nai ko'a gi nai ko'e fatci}?)= since neither is true in the absolute sense.

If "color" is defined in terms of the wavelengths/frequencies= of the photons bouncing off of the fruits, then kohe's statement is ce= rtainly not fatci and koha's statment is probably fatci, but koha can&#= 39;t know that just based on koha's observation.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o mi= 'e .arpis.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--0015174780e4c5a0a304a94d2eee--