Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[bob@rattlesnake.com]

   What would be the x2 of jetnu for "defacto truth" in this case?

A phrase based on the notion of {conventional experience rather than law};
something like {tcaci selfri} rather than {flalu}.

* practice (customary practice),
* ritual (custom/habit),
    x1 is a custom/habit/[ritual/rut] of x2 under conditions x3
    /:/ [also: x1 is customary/usual/the practice]
    /=/ tcaci (cac)

* experience,
    x2 of: x1 [person/passive/state] undergoes/experiences x2
    (event/experience); x2 happens to x1
    /:/ [also has/have (of events/experiences); (adjective:) x1 and x2 are
    empirical; suggests passive undergoing but does not exclude active
    (per zukte) intent; a deserved experience: reward or punishment (=
    jernyfri, zanjernyfri, maljernyfri)]
    /=/ lifri (lif fri)

* legal (pertaining to the law, licit),
    x1 is a law specifying x2 (state/event) for community x3 under
    conditions x4 by lawgiver(s) x5
    /:/ [x1 is a legality; x2 is legal/licit/legalized/a legality (=
    selfla for reordered places)]
    /=/ flalu (fla)


   > ...  you, the listener or reader, know what
   > standard/epistemology/metaphysics x2 the speaker is using, and if
   > not, the speaker would be willing to fill in the x2 place.

   But isn't that what happens with every word?

Well, no.  Not with {fatci}, unless they go to some effort, using one
of the BAI modals.  {fatci} does not have a built-in place for the
epistemology, so the language-imposed assumption is that speaker and
listener already share and understanding.  If they don't, it takes the
kind of effort one has in English.


   When someone uses the word {fatci}, that doesn't mean that
   they believe that there is a truth and they know it.

Well, according to the definition, that is the case (unless they are
being ironical, fuzzy, or lying).   It is very straightforward.


* fact (absolute truth),
    x1 (du'u) is a fact/reality/truth/actuality, in the absolute
    /:/
    /=/ fatci (fac)


   There can always be disagreement, ...

Yes.  But only part of the time do people disagree with themselves.
It is called cognitive dissonance and people feel uncomfortable while
experiencing it.  As for disagreement with other people ... well, that
happens all the time.  One would expect that among a bunch of
biological Von Neuman machines.

   >I don't think that is stretching anything at all, but is exactly as
   >djuno should be used.

   Ok, that's how Lojbab says it should be used. The difference
   with English "know" is that according to Lojbab someone who
   doesn't agree that x2 is true will still make that claim.

Yes, I think Lojbab is right.

--

    Robert J. Chassell                    bob@rattlesnake.com
    moved house; new address:
    952 East St., Lenox, MA 01240 USA     +1 (413) 442-7761