| It is important to notice that xod's claim/challenge is an empirical
generalization, not -- as the connection with words has led us to think sometimes -- about definitions. For every x and y there is a z such that if x believes y then z would count as evidence for y within x's epistemology and x believes z. Note especially the "within x's epistemology", which goes beyond belief toward truth and knowledge and away from what I (or any non-x) might believe. |