RE: [lojban] ui and truth (was: Re: Re: a new kind of fundamentalism)

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

xod:
> Also, a long argument concluded that, sometimes, the pure
> emotional indicators could affect truth, and that propositional attitude
> indicators don't always.

That debate happened at a time when I was too busy to keep up with the
list. Is there any chance of someone outlining the conclusions on the
wiki (on a page under Proposed Interpretive Conventions), like I did
for the big ka debate?

> And the Book itself says "In fact, the entire distinction between pure
> emotions and propositional attitudes is itself a bit shaky: ``.u'u'' can
> be seen as a propositional attitude indicator meaning ``I regret that
> ....'', and ``a'e'' (discussed below) can be seen as a pure emotion meaning
> ``I'm awake/aware''. The division of the attitudinals into pure-emotion
> and propositional-attitude classes in this chapter is mostly by way of
> explanation; it is not intended to permit firm rulings on specific points.
> "

This is reasonable enough, because linguists and cognitive scientists
(and perhaps psychologists -- but I don't know about that) find it 
very difficult or impossible to disentangle emotion and propositional 
attitude.

--And.