Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

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

> >1. Jorge is completely correct about the meaning of "know", but
> >   not everyone has managed to realize it.
> >
> >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".
> >
> >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.]
>   That depends on your definition of "metaphysics" - as I reported,
> epistemology is the subcategory of metaphysics dealingw ith how we know
> what we know.

I know, and I gather that therefore most of us think "epistemology"
inappropriate as a label, preferring "metaphysics" = "model of the
world, of how the world is and works".

> >4. There seems to be a general sense that (2) and (3) are
> >   incompatible.
> >
> >I would take issue with (4). (2) and (3) are compatible: "djuno"
> >asserts that x1 beliefs x2 to be true about x3 within metaphysics
> >x4, and it presupposes that x2 is true.
> But since truth is not an absolute (at least not in Lojban - unless you mean
 fat
> fatci rather than jetnu), this still seems wrong.  I may not have access to
> le djuno's metaphysics/episte,ology, and my own metaphysics/epostemology may
> not generate the same truths that le djuno's does.

In that case, "djuno" would be inappropriate as a choice of gismu
to describe that situation.

You may not like that conclusion, but it is forced upon you by
our agreed principles of respecting baselines and usage.

> I agree with you that Jorge is more or less correct with reagrd to how djuno
> has been and will be used in practice - pretty much like English "know".
> But that is because for the most part, the things that we have wanted to say
> have been translations from English, and/or have been formulated in English
> before expressing in Lojban.  Furthermore there are certain people that are
> comfortable dealing with multiple ways of knowing, and it is those people
> who will more likely use Lojban djuno differently than English know.  But
> scientists and computer people, who dominate the Lojban community right now
> are among the most limiting people I knwo as to what is a knowledge-generating
> epistemology.  So present usage is not a very good guide for the long term.

We can only wait and see, as to that.

--And