Subject: Re: [lojban] Knowledge (was: Random lojban questions/annoyances

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:45:13 -0500

Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> Ohhh... That is _SUCH_ a perfect example. I'm talking about this with
> one of my sweeties and she said that it makes sense to say that "Sophie
> KNOWS Mohammed is Allah's only prophet"

Just to set the record straight, Muslims recognize many prophets before
Muhammad, ranging from Moses to Isa (the son of Maryam).

> because we all have our own
> realities

In your reality we may each have our own reality, but in my reality
there is only one reality, and it doesn't belong to me. :-)

Seriously, we may have different beliefs, but we all share the same
Primary World.

> and having to change her knowledge into belief subsumes her
> own reality into our own, and is hence disrespectful and patronizing.
> She also thinks (and I agree) that having to say "I believe that Sophie
> KNOWS Mohammed is Allah's only prophet" is just unnecessarily verbose
> and silly.

It is, because that sentence can still be true only if Mohammed is
Allah's only prophet. You can affirm your belief about Sophie's belief,
or you can affirm Sophie's belief directly (and perhaps be in error),
but you cannot truthfully affirm Sophie's knowledge of p unless:

1) Sophie believes p
2) p is true
3) Sophie's belief is justified ("if it weren't true, she wouldn't
believe it")
4) Sophie's belief follows from p's truth ("if it were true, she
would believe it")

(The last two points are subtle, and beyond the current scope of this
discussion.)

> She also proposed the example of colorblindness. It is ridiculous for
> me to have to report Steve's observation of something I see as green,
> which he sees as blue by saying "Steve believes that's blue". Bullshit,
> he _knows_ it's blue, he can see it with his own two eyes.

He may think he knows it, or affirm that he knows it, but he does *not*
know it. You can say "Steve perceives that as blue", which takes
Steve's beliefs out of it. (BTW, blue/green colorblindness is extremely
rare.)

John Dalton, the discoverer of atomic weight, wore gray stockings to
meeting (he was a Quaker), except that sometimes they were red -- he
couldn't tell the difference. Are we to say that Dalton knew his
stockings were gray, but in fact they were red? Not at all. When
someone pointed out his error, he then knew they were red, though
he still perceived them to be gray. Before his error was pointed
out, he simply had no knowledge. Since he was aware of his
color-blindness, he probably had no belief that he knew the color
of his socks, any more than I believe that I know that there is
life on Jupiter. (I neither believe nor disbelieve that there is
life on Jupiter, for the record.)

> Yes, I know color is subjective in lojban, but if djuno can only talk
> about true things then it can't talk about subjective things at all, so
> that doesn't help.

Matters that are genuinely not true or false are not matters of knowledge.
That does not limit, or only to a small degree, Lojban's ability to
talk about them.

But in any event you *can* know subjective things, particularly subjective
things about yourself, e.g. "I know that I am in a rage".

-- 
There is / one art || John Cowan <[email-masked]>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein