Re: [lojban] RE:Trivalent Logics

Happily, you don't need to know much logic to use a logical language (I cite Lojbab as my classic case). It is enough to have the tools needed and know how to use them; what they mean in some formal sense is not important except as an occasional guide about usage. We have, for example, gotten along fairly well with the bivalent IF (ganai gi) for 50 years, with only occasional worries in ordinary conversation. In more technical discussions, we have worked out some modal solutions, which are not commonly used nor well understood. If the need for these become acute, a quick lesson or two should suffice to get the usage right, whatever the technical completeness is. That is, Lojban is buying symbols and terminology, not complete theories (the properties of time -- finite, infinite, circular, dense, discrete, linear, branching, and so on -- don't affect how tense work or even how they are interpreted).

From: Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Cc: jjllambias@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:Trivalent Logics

On Sunday, August 5, 2012 6:22:48 PM UTC+4, djandus wrote:

I knew nothing of the existence of trivalent logic before this thread, but there is something I can say.

On Sunday, August 5, 2012 3:18:46 AM UTC-5, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
OK. May be a short tutorial for newbies (non-experts in logic) what this is all about?
May be some kinda table with normal evidentials and your proposals in another?
http://aymara.org/biblio/html/igr/igr3.html looks perfect but incomprehensible for ordinary ponies.
I want something that a 5y.o. could understand.
For those interested in diving in, I started getting an idea by instead glancing at wikiponia and then reading over the Aymara document. Also for those diving in, it's useful to know that the author of that other link starts with an introduction, proceeds to some basic description of bivalent logic when the bullets show up, gets into the nitty-gritty description of bivalent logic when the tables show up, and finally gets to the trivalent stuff with "Representation of trivalent truth-values"

I BELIEVE THAT IT'S ONE OF FEW GREAT IDEAS THAT LOJBAN CURRENTLY LACKS.
So actually I'm quite interested in it.
Although I don't like redefining the meaning of any cmavo including CAI.
I would like to mention here that rather than redefining CAI, you could:
define an experimental cmavo as "a trivalent logic marker" and use CAI on it as one was proposing to use CAI on ja'a
define a couple of base experimental cmavo to represent a few of the base trivalent logics, as was done in lojban with the bivalent logical connectives, and then define how CAI alter them.

Past that, I actually have a fundamental question that, when answered, should probably help a newbie jump into discussion. What are the examples (in lojban) of instances what these terms refer to: modal functor, connective (two-variable) functor.

Honestly, I find it something that will not be of particular use to me,

Imagine or not but the whole Lojban is of no use for me. And for most inhabitants of the Earth.

but it sounds pretty cool if {rodo} manage to get it working for yourselves. Thus, make an orthogonal usage of Lojban, please.

If I only knew how to explain all that stuff in plain language. I understand it in formulae but when it comes to choosing words in real conversation it'll be a nightmare for me.

I guess we just need to produce a bunch of sentences and learn them by rot in order to use these new cmavo IRL.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/0MsVP200yUQJ.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.