Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

> At 04:33 PM 1/21/98 GMT+0, And Rosta wrote:
> >> >3. "Knowing", unlike the official place-structure of "djuno", has
> >> >   no "epistemology" argument. [As John has pointed out, this is
> >> >   not actually an epistemology argument but a metaphysics argument.]
> >>   That depends on your definition of "metaphysics" - as I reported,
> >> epistemology is the subcategory of metaphysics dealingw ith how we know
> >> what we know.
> >
> >I know, and I gather that therefore most of us think "epistemology"
> >inappropriate as a label, preferring "metaphysics" = "model of the
> >world, of how the world is and works".
>
> I think we'll need a poll to justify that. Metaphysics seems
> to inclusive.

Presuppositions and the x4 place apart, "djuno" means "x1
believes x2 to be true about x3". To me, an "epistemology"
place would give "Because of x4, x1 believes
x2 to be true about x3", i.e. the reason for the believing,
while the intention for the x4 is that is be X in
"X1 believes that because of x4, x2 is true about x3", i.e.
x4 is the worldmodel according to which x2 is true.

To my mind, "metaphysics" is vague, but "epistemology" is
positively misleading.

--And