Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>>    what kind of double check do you want?  i thought Yahoo press
>>    releases were considered defacto truth....
>
>
>Let's see. How would we say that in Lojban? Here's a possibility:
>
>        i do djica le mo remei bo cipra
>        You want what kind of double-testing?
>
>        i mi krici le du'u jinvi le du'u le nuzba be fi la ia'us cu fatci
>        I believed that it is opined that news from Yahoo are facts.
>
>Any other suggestions?

        i mi krici le du'u jinvi le du'u lo nuzba befi le la ia'us kagni
        ke sevzi nuzba cu se jetnu/ve djuno

would seem better to me, though I think that krici there is really jinvi
and jinvi wher you had it is legitimately djuno.

I think that the idea being proposed by Bob is that the news from
Yahoo is being taken as a valid authority/epistemology for certyain kinds
of knowledge.  The speaker is clearly distancing himself from accepting
its universal validity as an epistemology, while not claiming that the
"knowledge" is in any way invalid.  He is recognizing that others consider
the source as an epistemological source to differing degrees.  There is no
question that all such news is fact in the absolute - the question is whether,
for example, aparticular press release might be considered a valid se jetnu
by all readers, or whether it is a ve djuno for those readers who choose
to accept it as such.

Let us say that the particular news item indeed DOES convey truth (as
widely recognized).  For some people it is truth because they got it from
Yahoo press releases.  Others, more skeptical of complany self-promotion,
would not consider that a valid epistemology (r metaphysical basis), but would
require some other type or level of evidence.  Thus A djuno F fo la ia'us.
and B djuno F fo le drata, but B na djuno F fo la ia'us. because B does not
accept the epsitemological source as valid.

Clearly here, to A, F jetnu la ia'us is a true proposition, while to B it is
a false proposition.  I could report this state without committing myself to
"knowing" F by either epistemology accepted by A or B (I may not be sure
or I may have a third epistemological basis).

lojbab
----
lojbab                                                lojbab@access.digex.net
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                        703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab
    or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/";
    Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.