Re: [lojban] Set of answers encore

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

And Rosta wrote:


> John believes that Bill's age is the cube root of 389017.
>
> ... when John has the thought "It is the case that Bill is 73".

This example makes me wonder how much of the issue is epistemology,
and how much is the conventions of indirect discourse.

Suppose it is 1959, and Kemal is looking at the night sky.  He
sees a bright object, he knows not what, rise in the west,
transit the entire sky in some 20-30 minutes, and set in the east.

Would either of you object to the sentence "Kemal saw that Echo was
orbiting the Earth", on the grounds that Kemal did not have the
thought "Echo is orbiting the Earth", since Kemal knows nothing
of Echo and perhaps nothing of orbiting?

How about the simpler sentence "Kemal saw Echo"?  Surely this one
is not controversial: one may see something without knowing its
name.  If there is a difference, what is the difference?

--
Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
   the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
   in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel