[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: Re: [lojban] Random lojban questions/annoyances.
At 05:00 PM 03/26/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote:
#mi djuno le du'u pa sirje be by bei da cu panra le sirje be cy bei dy kei fo
#le tamske pe la .iuklid
#mi djuno le du'u naku pa sirje be by bei day cu panra le sirje be cy bei dy
#kei fo le tamske pe na'e la .iuklid
#pe'i ru'e
The interesting thing is that in both cases the se djuno is (I think) true,
relative to the different geometries/axiom sets.
Whether this means that *I* can truthfully say "ko'a djuno fe homosexuality-
is-a-sin fo fundamentalist-jegvo-dogma", I'm not sure. I suppose the answer
is Yes.
It seems key to me that ANYONE should be able to say that truthfully if
indeed ko'a is satisfied with the dogma as a means of establishing truth.
I should add, BTW, that this conclusion would contradict both Bob
Chassell's message on this point & my response to it.
I'm not sure how.
That is, contra Bob, the ve djuno is not how you come to know the se djuno
but rather the body of propositions such that their truth entails the
truth of the
x2.
No, because that would entail only logically consistent
epistemologies. One of the ways that X can djuno P while Y can djuno not-P
is to use a logically inconsistent epistemology (which fundamentalist-dogma
may qualify for %^). Dreams and astrology are both classically used
veldjuno that yielded differing or even contradictory seldjuno to different
djuno.
They thus very poorly are communicated through jetnu, which supports no
observer dependency on the truth. jetnu needs a self-consistent epistemology.
Using krici instead of djuno seems to me to deny that the veldjuno is a
valid source of evidence for truth or at least admits to skepticism as to
that claim.
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org