Re: knowledge and belief

[Rob Zook <rzook@INFORMIX.COM>]

At 11:57 AM 1/21/98 -0500, John Cowan wrote:
>Logical Language Group wrote:
>
>> Now if Y is a proposition based on djuno, then the above statement says
that
>> someone knows the x2 of Y at time X.  If indeed that someone knows that
x2 at
>>  time X, then the fact that this x2 is found to be false should not change
>> the truth valiue of the X-time knowledge claim.
>
>What we're saying is that "x1 knows that x2 at time X" and "x2 is false" are
>contradictory statements.  If x2 turns out to be false, then x1 didn't
>know x2 at any time, no matter what x1 or anyone else believed at time X.

Then in Lojban terms it seems you want to mix a jetnu claim and a fatcu
claim. That seems like a main problem here. Again I think we must
regard truth as a measurable quantity relative to the instrument or
it makes no sense.

What it looks to me we have here are two camps, one who wants to base
djuno claims on fatci and one who wants to base djuno claims on jetnu.
I think the baseline implies jetnu rather than fatci.


Rob Z.
--------------------------------------------------------
Were it offered to my choice, I should have no objection
to a repetition of the same life from its beginning, only
asking the advantages authors have in a second edition to
correct some faults in the first.
-- Ben Franklin