Re: knowledge and belief

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

>So you agree that if I say {mi djuno ko'a}, then that entails that
>I think {ko'a jetnu}? That's at least something. Did I interpret
>your words correctly?


Yes proviuded thatdjuno and jetnu have identical ellipsized "epistemologies".

>Now what about in other than the first person? If I say {la djan
>djuno ko'a}, do I need to think that {ko'a jetnu},

Again it depends on having the same epistemology, and then in this case it
depends on the specific epistemology.  If I have no access to ko'a s
epistemology for la djan, then I may not know whether ko'a jetnu is valid.

If you were to explain some arbitrary fact about the Spanish language as
spoken in Argentina (call that fact ko'a) and told it to me, I might say
"Jorge knows that ko'a is true by native speaker knowledge".  But I
could not then say after you told me it that >I< know that ko'a is
tru by native speaker knowledge.  >I< know it by your aythority.
Now is ko'a "true" i.e. jetnu.  Hopefully so.  But if it turned out that
you oversimplified in telling me the rule, or even erred because you did
not think of some aspect of the issue that another native speaker would
recognize, then what I say you know, and what I say I know because you told
me, is actually false.

>>Fuzzy versions of djuno could also be use to handle
>>lack of certainty, but the realm of opinions as non-certain facts tend to
>>exclude both faith (where there is no evidence) and the possibility of
>having
>>certain knowledge.  An opinion is based on evidence or reasoning that has
>>unknowns/variables that cannot be accounted for.
>
>Right, but {djuno} is not just {birti}, is it? The x2 of djuno has to be
>jetnu,
>whereas the x2 of birti need not be.

birti is an emotion word,  It is probably more akin to a strong krici
than it is to djuno.  But birti doesn't suggest lack of evidence, and hence
COULD be used for cases of krici, jinvi, AND djuno.

>Ok, change the speaker to the context. The context in which the djuno
>--More--
>assertion is made has to be such that the respective jetnu assertion
>(same predicate, same epistemology) also holds.


This is true for rational epistemologies (I think), but they are not the only
kind that can be discussed with Lojban.

BY the way, if you bring in birti for contrast with djuno, you should also
lokk at jimpe for contrast.  jimpe has a place strcuture ije djuno but without
 the epistemology place.  But I think it is more akin to djuno than birti is,
even if it has less tie to jetnu.

lojbab