On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Minimiscience
<minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
de'i li 08 pi'e 04 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Luke Bergen .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> so in example 7.3 of chapter 14 in the CLL, we have the following:
> mi dotco .ijo mi ricfu .ijo mi nanmu
> I am-German. If-and-only-if I am-rich. If-and-only-if I am-a-man.
>
> after which it says that if we work out the truth table for this we
> see that an accurate translation of this would be:
> Of the three properties --- German-ness, wealth, and manhood -- I
> possess either exactly one or else all three.
>
> But this looks to me like this would be exactly 0 or all three, not
> exactly 1. Could someone explain this (admittedly) very
> counter-intuitive result?
.skamyxatra
A single "iff" statement is true if both operands are true OR both operands are
false. Thus, if you are neither German nor rich, then "{mi dotco .ijo mi
ricfu}" is true, and so "{mi dotco .ijo mi ricfu .ijo mi nanmu}" would require
that you are a man in order to be true. Similarly, if you are German or rich,
but not both, then "{mi dotco .ijo mi ricfu}" is false, and so you cannot also
be a man. The truth table looks like this:
d|r|n|d<->r<->n
-|-|-|---------
T|T|T| T
T|T|F| F
T|F|T| F
T|F|F| T
F|T|T| F
F|T|F| T
F|F|T| T
F|F|F| F
mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.
--
bu'u la lojbangug. lo bangu cu daspo do