Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

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

> >I don't really think that your point is relevant to the issue about
> >{djuno}. Even if the true-x2 meaning were given to {djuno}, a lujvo
> >could be created to be the same except for the x2's truth being
> >unspecified. And vice versa.
>
> But the true-x2 meaning could not be given to djuno without adding a
> metaphysics place, which is not possible.

For multiple demonstrations of the falsity of that assertion ("the true-x2
meaning could not be given to djuno without adding a metaphysics
place"), see most of my recent postings, passim.

--And.