Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Meaningless talk

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 21:06:20 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 2 Mar 2001 [email-masked] wrote:

> Oh, the discussion wasn't *that* bad. The repetition of {gerna flalu) on one
> side and {pilno} on the other gave that away (it helps they are words I
> know). The transitions were harder and I am still not too clear on how you
> got from my philosophic pabulum, "A sentence is meaningful just in case there
> is a test to determine whether it is true" to the langue-parole part (what
> gets tested, apparently). The pabulum, exciting as it was in the 20's and
> even in the 50's (and Carnap was still working with it in 1960), never really
> had much of a chance: when it got rid of theology, it got rid of theoretical
> physics, and when physics was gotten back in, theology came along. And then,
> as xorxes noted, there was the inevitable problem of all philosophic
> absolutes, the statement that embodied it (see above) is meaningless by the
> criterion it lays down, i.e., it is untestable. (Nagarjuna rules!)

mi talsa do'o le pu'u cipra le ka morsi ra

mi frasku fu le do sevzi cipra selcpedu fe le si'o le flalu cu selstidi
skicu le xamgu seltra .i fy. na selzgana fatci tu'a le mulno .iseni'ibo na
mapti le li'i cipra

mi to'e cpatu'i le si'o co'u flalu

-----
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!