From araizen@newmail.net Mon Sep 03 14:50:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 3 Sep 2001 21:50:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 35168 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 21:48:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Sep 2001 21:48:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO out.newmail.net) (212.150.54.158) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Sep 2001 21:48:19 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer ([62.0.181.142]) by out.newmail.net ; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:49:21 +0200 Message-ID: <000001c134ca$af91f160$8eb5003e@oemcomputer> To: References: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Induction Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:57:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 From: "Adam Raizen" la .xorxes. cusku di'e > >We still don't have a way to say "conclude", whether by induction, > >deduction, or abduction (i.e. the bridi equivalent of "ja'o"). Unless > >perhaps this is "jinvi". > > Maybe jivbi'o: x1 concludes (comes to believe) that x2 is true > about x3 based on x4. Maybe also 'kanji': mi kanji le nu do se xajmi kei le nu do cmila la .lojbab. cusku di'e > nibli certainly refers to deduction. Does this mean it's not a good idea to say something like: le nu la .sokrates. e so'i drata remna cu mrobi'o cu nibli le nu ro remna cu mrobi'o Isn't nibli a little more general than just deduction with its x3? mu'o mi'e .adam.