RE: [jboske] Opacity and belief

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

I wrote:
> Partly it depends on whether we say that Cicero and Tully are
> intensionally equivalent, i.e. synonymous, or merely extensionally
> equivalent. For Clark Kent and Superman, I think it is clear that
> they are not synonymous. For Cicero and Tully, or Jorge/xorxes,
> Nick/nitcion, Bob/Lojbab, it's harder to argue that they aren't
> synonymous -- mere unconditioned allomorphs, in a certain sense
> --, in which case we are talking not about which du'u Ralph believes
> but rather which sedu'u Ralph would give the thumbs-up to 

Similarly, I think that "water" and "H2O" are not intensionally
equivalent but "wolfram" and "tungsten" are. The nonexchangeability
of "water" and "H2O" would already be handlable in Lojban. Any
noninterchangeability of "wolfram" and "tungsten" would have to be
done by using an "assent to" predicate with a sedu'u sumti.

--And.