Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[bob@rattlesnake.com]

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


   >   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.

   No, I meant that they don't have to know what is the truth. I thought
   my example was clear:

               mi na djuno ro fatci la lojban
               I don't know all facts about Lojban.

   That's an example of a use of {fatci} where the speaker does not
   know the facts in question.

Right, the speaker does not know the instances.  But the Lojban
presuppose that there would be { a fact/reality/truth/actuality } to
know if the speaker knew them.


   The speaker might even not know whether there is a fact at all, as
   was the case in the translation that originated this subthread:

           i mi krici le du'u jinvi le du'u le nuzba be fi la ia'us cu fatci
           I believed that it is opined that news from Yahoo are facts.

   So using the word {fatci} does not at all require that one believe
   that there is a truth, and much less to know that truth.

Again, it is opined that the news from Yahoo are { truths and
actualities }.  In this case, you may not know what they are, that is,
you may not know the instances, but you are presupposing the instances
exist; moreover, you are presupposing they possess defining
characteristics, that of being { truths and actualities }.

This means that you will discover that the predication you had in mind
(the value returned by {le du'u} ) is wrong when on further examination
you find that either the instances you presuppose do not exist or they
are false or both.

(Pretty obviously, since we are dealing with an indeterminate number
of instances, there is some fuzziness in how many instances or how
badly instances must be false for the predication as a whole to be
false.  What criteria do we use?  Even without an infinite regress, we
may need to examine a great many aspects of the situation simply to
agree on evaluation criteria, much less on { ro lo fatci } in this
particular universe of discourse.  This is why legal procedings and
scientific research are so time consuming and expensive.)

--

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