[lojban-beginners] fatci

[tengo <yurock.tengo@gmail.com>]

Some people dislike the word {fatci}. Why? Let's look into its
definition:

x1 (du'u) is a fact/reality/truth/actuality, in the absolute.

What's wrong with it? We can't be sure that we know the absolute
truth! But does it make such a word useless? I state, no. There are
good uses for it. First, I'll try to make up some arguments against
{fatci} and analyze them.

Argument: usage of {fatci} can be misleading.

Well, it can be misleading, if we look at it from a "usual" point of
view. For example:

.i lo du'u lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu cu fatci
The fact that a dog looks at a cat is the absolute truth.

Too much self-confidence. :) However, if we look at it from a logical
point of view, there is nothing wrong with it. What is {lo gerku ca
catlu lo mlatu} alone? It's a claim that a dog looks at a cat. Does it
have to be the absolute truth? No, because in my opinion, any claim
about the reality is a belief at best. We can take it as "the author
believes that a dog looks at a cat". Now what is {xy fatci}? It's a
claim that some fact X corresponds to reality. Does it have to be the
absolute truth? No! The same rule applies here: "the author believes
that the fact X corresponds to reality". So, let's try to interpret
the same sentence in a logical way:

.i lo du'u lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu cu fatci
.i lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu
A dog looks at a cat.

That's it. From a logical point of view, the truth-value of the two
sentences is the same. So, don't be afraid and don't be misled!

Argument: there is not much use for such a word.

Why not? We can very well talk about something that we don't know. For
example, we don't know for sure whether the space of our universe is
infinite. However, we have the words "infinite space", we have the
symbol "∞", and we have a lot of uses for it.

Now to the actual examples. We have the words {nu} and {fasnu} to
convert between actual claims and events:

.i lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu
.i ko'a nu go'i
.i ko'a fasnu

Very easy! Remember, that {ko'a fasnu} doesn't have to be "the
absolute truth". The same way, the words {du'u} and {fatci} allow to
convert between actual claims and facts.

.i lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu
.i ko'e du'u go'i
.i ko'e fatci

And again, {ko'e fatci} is just a claim, the same way that {lo gerku
ca catlu lo mlatu} is a claim.
.i de'u melbi mi .i xu go'i do ji'a

Another example:

.i mi na mulno birti lo du'u ro lo se djuno be mi bei lo to'e mucti
munje cu fatci
I'm not completely sure that all that I know about the real world are
actual facts.

Argument: we don't need {fatci} because we have {jetnu}.

There are similar gusmu in Lojban with different sets of places, and
there are uses for each of them. First, the truth values of {lo gerku
ca catlu lo mlatu} and {lo du'u lo gerku ca catlu lo mlatu cu jetnu}
can be different depending on the referents of implicit {zo'e} at
jetnu2. So we'd need to put something explicit there, maybe {zi'o} or
something that means "reality". Do we have a word for "reality"? :)
And then, why bother, when we have a nice gismu {fatci}? :)

.i xu do ca ca'o xebni zo fatci .i ko joi mi casnu

-- 
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.