I claim you as my fellow-traveller because it comes down to this: On the Adam/John/Jordan/Nick story, it is clearer what sort of picture the speaker is describing, precisely because the picture is required to be objective. On the And/xorxes story, it is less clear what sort of picture the speaker is describing, because the picture is allowed to be subjective.
Insisting on objective representations of truth/reality rather than subjective ones is a violation of metaphysical neutrality, so counter to principles of Lojban that you hold dear.
> > I would tend to use lo'e (broda) for those properties that might be useful
> in writing a dictionary definition of the *denotation* of broda, whereas I
> would use le'e (broda) to invoke *connotation*, and of course connotations
> are culture and context-specific
>
> But what this has to do with squinting, I can't say
I certainly didn't intend to claim that your actual understanding of lo'e/le'e places you on my side. What places you on my side is that the debate comes down to metaphysical neutrality vs. compulsory objectivism (I'm not sure if 'objectivism' is the correct term,
but you know what I mean -- the idea that we all share the same worldview).
-- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org