From pycyn@aol.com Fri Apr 20 14:04:53 2001
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 20 Apr 2001 21:04:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 68715 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r14.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.68) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Apr 2001 21:04:51 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.9.) id r.fe.528e9c3 (4340) for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:38 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <fe.528e9c3.2811fe66@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:38 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] Entail, Implicate (was: not only
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519
From: pycyn@aol.com

--part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 4/20/2001 12:55:03 PM Central Daylight Time, 
xod@sixgirls.org writes:


> Does anybody who needs to ask what "entail" means understand "classic
> bivalent first order logic", "alethic modalities", "S5", or "deontic
> modalities"? I hope I don't need all this to be able to think clearly or
> use Lojban effectively.
> 
> 
> I gather that "entail" refers to logical deduction (nibli), and
> 

No, but you wanted to play in the meta-game. There you do have to-- if not 
know these guys -- at least know what they are about and where to get the 
details if they become important. They are all easy to come by (people keep 
touting McCawley, for example), but they take a little time. In general, I'd 
suggest using the time to write better Lojban; there are enough of us 
meta-players already.

Implicature is not inductive (in any of the senses of that word and certainly 
not in one that could be called {tolsucta}), it is deductive from a fairly 
vague set of premises -- closer to legal or casuistical reasoning than 
scientific or statistical.

--part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 4/20/2001 12:55:03 PM Central Daylight Time, 
<BR>xod@sixgirls.org writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Does anybody who needs to ask what "entail" means understand "classic
<BR>bivalent first order logic", "alethic modalities", "S5", or "deontic
<BR>modalities"? I hope I don't need all this to be able to think clearly or
<BR>use Lojban effectively.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>I gather that "entail" refers to logical deduction (nibli), and
<BR>"implicate" refers to induction (tolsucta)?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>No, but you wanted to play in the meta-game. &nbsp;There you do have to-- if not 
<BR>know these guys -- at least know what they are about and where to get the 
<BR>details if they become important. &nbsp;They are all easy to come by (people keep 
<BR>touting McCawley, for example), but they take a little time. &nbsp;In general, I'd 
<BR>suggest using the time to write better Lojban; there are enough of us 
<BR>meta-players already.
<BR> 
<BR>Implicature is not inductive (in any of the senses of that word and certainly 
<BR>not in one that could be called {tolsucta}), it is deductive from a fairly 
<BR>vague set of premises -- closer to legal or casuistical reasoning than 
<BR>scientific or statistical.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_fe.528e9c3.2811fe66_boundary--

