Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[bob@rattlesnake.com]

   But even if every word had a place for the metapphysics, that
   wouldn't help much, because we still would need a common
   meta-metaphysics to recognize whether the claim about
   the metaphysics was true.

I am not sure the point of this remark.  It sounds like a variant on
Xeno's paradox.  In a previous message you also mentioned an an
infinite regress:

    Is that a true claim? We need a metaphysics to evaluate
    whether that claim is true or not. Say that we find such metaphysics,
    let's call it A. Then we say:

                le du'u
                    le du'u la iesus cu cevni cu jetnu le xriso lijda
                        cu jetnu abu

                The claim:
                     "that Jesus is God is a truth of Christianity"
                          is true by metaphysics A.

    Is this new claim true or not? We need yet again a metaphysics.
    And we can go on ad infinitum. The problem is that we're trying to
    include the metaphysics in the language, which is kind of
    contradictory.

Let's answer your question: is this new claim true.  Here is the procedure:

  Examine the following utterances.

    1. The claim: "that X" is true by metaphysics A.

    2. The claim:  {The claim: "that X" is true by metaphysics A.}
           is true by metaphysics B.

    3. The claim:  [The claim:  {The claim: "that X" is true by metaphysics A.}
           is true by metaphysics B.] is true by metaphysics C.

  Is the truth value of 3 different from the truth value of 2 when
  metaphysics C is the same as nmetaphysics B?

  The answer is no, if you select the right metaphysics.

  You may now create and examine new utterances 4, 5, 6, etc, as many
  as you like, and determine to your satisfaction that adding a new
  claim does not change the truth value; and this applies no matter
  how many you add.

  Adding a new claim does not change the truth value.  Hence,
  adding any number of new claims does not change the truth value.

  Hence, you do not need a new metaphysics.

  Hence, you are saved from the fate of falling into an infinite
  regress.  Xeno manages to walk across the room.  In their race,
  Achilles runs past the tortoise.  The arrow reaches its target.


Likewise, we may still

   "need a common meta-metaphysics to recognize
   whether the claim about the metaphysics was true."

as you said above, but we don't need more than one or two, so again
the problem can be solved.

--

    Robert J. Chassell                    bob@rattlesnake.com
    moved house; new address:
    952 East St., Lenox, MA 01240 USA     +1 (413) 442-7761