Re: [lojban] "knowledge as to who saw who" readings

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la pycyn cusku di'e

> (is this where knowing a=b and Fa means you
> ought to know Fb?).

You shouldn't be able to get away with this type of bamboozzlement
in Lojban. Knowing that something is equal to itself only requires
that you understand the meaning of 'equal'. Knowing that what is
referred to by 'a' is the same as what is referred to by 'b' is
a different issue, and of course requires to know what 'a' refers
to and what 'b' refers to. {la djan djuno le du'u ko'a du ko'e}
should not require at all that John knows who is being referred
to by the prosumti {ko'a} and {ko'e}, which is something that only
concerns the speaker and the listener. It is something that John
can know only if {ko'a du ko'e} is true and all it requires is that
John understands the meaning of identity. If he does understand it,
then of course he knows that anything is equal (=) to itself.

Unfortunately we probably won't succeed in avoiding the
bamboozzlement in Lojban. Indeed, apparently we can't even agree
that {le broda} has to be a meaningful description for the speaker
and listener only, not for the knower.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp