Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

[Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>]

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:

> At 03:41 PM 06/14/2001 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
> >On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:
> > > >You displayed it through the use of "gleki".
> > >
> > > No. He CLAIMED it - he might have done so in a monotone, and he might have
> > > falsely claimed it. Assertions can be true or false. Emotional displays
> > > simply ARE.
> >
> >With a fake smile or a contrived tantrum, emotional displays can be
> >faked. They are assertions of ones feelings, no?
>
> Lojban design does not recognize the possibility of false
> attitudinals. Hopefully it will never need to.



But the possibility is built into human behavior, even as much as I would
like to live in a world where nobody lies, to themselves or others. But I
am seeing people in this discussion agree to respect an invisible boundary
between logical assertions and emotional expressions. I am not sure it
really exists.

If .ui means "I am happy...", that is a provable logical assertion about
the reality of my emotions. There are situations where you will call me a
liar if I say .ui. Sales one, blatant denial another, politics a third.





-----
We do not like And if a cat
those Rs and Ds, needed a hat?
Who can't resist Free enterprise
more subsidies. is there for that!




From xod@sixgirls.org Fri Jun 15 04:02:59 2001
Return-Path: <xod@reva.sixgirls.org>
X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 15 Jun 2001 11:02:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 12230 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2001 11:02:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jun 2001 11:02:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Jun 2001 11:02:58 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5FB2vQ08322 for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:02:57 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:02:56 -0400 (EDT)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010615053835.00e06100@127.0.0.1>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0106150656580.8089-100000@reva.sixgirls.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:

> At 03:41 PM 06/14/2001 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
> >On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:
> > > >You displayed it through the use of "gleki".
> > >
> > > No. He CLAIMED it - he might have done so in a monotone, and he might have
> > > falsely claimed it. Assertions can be true or false. Emotional displays
> > > simply ARE.
> >
> >With a fake smile or a contrived tantrum, emotional displays can be
> >faked. They are assertions of ones feelings, no?
>
> Lojban design does not recognize the possibility of false
> attitudinals. Hopefully it will never need to.



But the possibility is built into human behavior, even as much as I would
like to live in a world where nobody lies, to themselves or others. But I
am seeing people in this discussion agree to respect an invisible boundary
between logical assertions and emotional expressions. I am not sure it
really exists.

If .ui means "I am happy...", that is a provable logical assertion about
the reality of my emotions. There are situations where you will call me a
liar if I say .ui. Sales one, blatant denial another, politics a third.





-----
We do not like And if a cat
those Rs and Ds, needed a hat?
Who can't resist Free enterprise
more subsidies. is there for that!