identity and general semantics

[lojbab (Bob LeChevalier)]

1.
general semantics is an approach, and not a well accepted one (Martin Gardner
has torn it to shreds, I believe).  We did not and will not embed it as
a mandatory underpinning of Lojban.  There is room in the language for 
different theories of language and identity.  You are not obligated to use 'du'
and unlike English 'is', you can avoid its use, if your beliefs forbid it.

2. When we talk about identity assertions we are not really talking about the
same thing general semantics does anyway.  We are saying that two names
descriptions or whatever have the same referent.  I certainly have the right
to call you eric now, and then in the next sentence just say "you".  It is
a kind of identity sentence to say that "do" and "la erik." are the same 
referent, and that you can substitute one for the other in any sentence
within th ediscourse and it does not change the sentence.  We make no claim
however that the you who reads this sentence is the same you as the one who 
read the first sentence of this posting.  Frankly, I don't care, so long as
something that answers to eric and has the appropriate memories and
understandings to know what I am talking about, reads this, and believes
that heis/you are being addressed.

In short, g.s. is for philosophers, not for me.

lojbab