From xod@sixgirls.org Sun Mar 18 20:43:03 2001
Return-Path: <xod@shiva.sixgirls.org>
X-Sender: xod@shiva.sixgirls.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 19 Mar 2001 04:43:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 45159 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2001 04:43:02 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Mar 2001 04:43:02 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO shiva.sixgirls.org) (206.252.141.232) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Mar 2001 04:43:01 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by shiva.sixgirls.org (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2J4K1810237 for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 18 Mar 2001 23:20:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 23:20:01 -0500 (EST)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Knowledge (was: Random lojban questions/annoyances.)
In-Reply-To: <20010318234050.H3953@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.30.0103182314200.9598-100000@shiva.sixgirls.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>

On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 10:54:45PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 10:01:52PM -0500, SwiftRain wrote:
> > > > John Cowan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > True. But when it changes, we deny that what we used to believe was,
> > > > > in fact, knowledge.
> > > >
> > > > .i sruma le du'u ro jitfa selkrici ku na seldjuno kei ku zo'u
> > > > no seldjuno cu zasti pe'i
> > >
> > > I'm sorry, that doesn't parse, and my understanding of the language is
> > > not up to the task of deconstructing it. Can you re-state?
> >
> >
> > e'u zo ru'a basti zo sruma
>
> Still doesn't parse. It's zo'u that's the issue.


Give the software a rest and read with your soul. Where's the fun if
Lojban is nothing but a glorified ROT13? Think of "zo'u" as "such that".
However, I read it as a nonsequitur.




> > > > .i ro selkrici cu jitfa .i se'o le prane nu jimpe cu na cumki .iare'e
> > >
> >
> >
> > .i ro selkrici cu jitfa no da
>
> How can 'no da' be a standard of falsity?



da means "There exists a...". Thus, the sentence means "There exists no
standard/epistemology/metaphysics such that every belief is false."



>
> -Robin
>
> --
> http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest.
> Information wants to be free. Too bad most of it is crap. --RLP
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

-----
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!


