Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

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

John:
> > 1. Jorge is completely correct about the meaning of "know", but
> >    not everyone has managed to realize it.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > 2. "Djuno" is in the baseline keyword-defined as "know", and
> >    all of the considerable usage of "djuno" has been in such a
> >    way that it could be faithfully translated by "know".
>
> Agreed.
>
> > 3. "Knowing", unlike the official place-structure of "djuno", has
> >    no "epistemology" argument. [As John has pointed out, this is
> >    not actually an epistemology argument but a metaphysics argument.]
>
> In other words, the x4 place is "how x2 is true" rather than "how x1
> knows".
>
> > "djuno"
> > asserts that x1 beliefs x2 to be true about x3 within metaphysics
> > x4, and it presupposes that x2 is true.
>
> Yes, except that not just every true belief counts as knowledge:
> "George knows that there is life on Jupiter" is false even if
> "George believes there is life on Jupiter" and "There is life on
> Jupiter" are both true.  The presupposition of truth must be
> justifiable.
>
> Furthermore, not even all justified true beliefs are knowledge, as I
> have explained before:  "Sam and Frank know that the European war is
> over" was false (a justified false belief) on 7 November 1918 in New
> York (because the war was not over), and equally false on 12 November
> in Bermuda (even though the war was now over).

I don't know whether I agree or not. Either way, this point is
a refinement of my more general point, which is that DJUNO means
"know" AND has a metaphysics place.

We can then go on to discuss what *precisely* counts as knowledge,
but it ceases to be a Lojban-specific issue (except to the extent
that DJUNO involves knowledge).