From pycyn@aol.com Sun Jun 10 14:39:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 10 Jun 2001 21:39:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 17714 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2001 21:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 10 Jun 2001 21:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m09.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.164) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Jun 2001 21:39:46 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.111.cadcca (17385) for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 17:39:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <111.cadcca.2855431c@aol.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 17:39:40 EDT Subject: Re: an approach to attitudinals To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_111.cadcca.2855431c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_111.cadcca.2855431c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit While I am not sure that the effect of attitudinals on truth values is the most interesting question about them nor the best way to put the question that is being asked under that rubric, it is the center of the present discussion. Permit me to try out a schema on this topic, classifying attitudinals as I Presupposing the attached bridi is true A. responding the claimed situation and its immediate, obvious, "inevitable" effects (pure emotions) B. responding to the possibilities it opens (I take it this is Lojbab's hope) II Not presupposing the attached bridi is true (maybe separated into no presupposition and presupposing false, but the next moves seem about the same -- though may have different names Response if it were true (hope-fear) Evaluation (should) Commitment to its being true (wish - intend ) Involvement of others (suggestion - power based range of petitions) I'm not sure about the structure of this last bit, but I think this is approximately correct. Comments? --part1_111.cadcca.2855431c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit While I am not sure that the effect of attitudinals on truth values is the
most interesting question about them nor the best way to put the question
that is being asked under that rubric, it is the center of the present
discussion.  Permit me to try out a schema on this topic, classifying
attitudinals as
I Presupposing the attached bridi is true
      A. responding the claimed situation and its immediate, obvious,
"inevitable"    
            effects (pure emotions)
      B. responding to the possibilities it opens (I take it this is
Lojbab's hope)
II Not presupposing the attached bridi is true (maybe separated into no
      presupposition and presupposing false, but the next moves seem about
the
      same -- though may have different names
            Response if it were true (hope-fear)
            Evaluation (should)
            Commitment to its being true (wish - intend )
                  Involvement of others (suggestion - power based range of
petitions)

I'm not sure about the structure of this last bit, but I think this is
approximately correct.

Comments? --part1_111.cadcca.2855431c_boundary--