Re: truths and knowledge

["Jorge J. Llambías" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

>Thoight of another example for Jorge to tear apart.
>
>The following seems to me a good example of "know" with a subjective
>truth, and it even is language based %^)
>
>John knows that in English it is improper to split an infinitive, but I
>know that this is false.
>
>I believe that the main verb being "know" renders the meaning different
>than using "opine" or even "consider" (whjoich in this case would usually
>be interpreted to mean "opine"), because opining speaks to the impropriety,
>whereas knowing speaks to it being a rule of propriety.  My claim to it
being
>false speaks to my knowing that the rule is in fact often broken in
>perfectly acceptable English speech.

I can think of two explanations. One is what Robin suggests, that
the first "know" is pronounced as in scare quotes, similar to the
case pc mentioned where sometimes "just knows" is used instead
of "knows". And already explained how this works.

The other possibility is what you hint at in your explanation. You're
using "is improper" in two different senses. You could just as well
say:  "I know that there is a rule that in English it is improper to split
an infinitive, and I know that the rule is in fact often broken in
perfectly acceptable English speech."  In other words, there is
no contradiction in both claims being true.

I don't mind if you want to keep giving examples like that one, but
I would like that you answer one of my examples. Consider
saying these two things:

(1) "I have two children but John knows that I really have only one."

(2) "I have two children but John is absolutely convinced that I really
       have only one."

Do you agree that most people would find (1) odd and (2)
quite acceptable? If you do, how do you explain it?

If you don't agree, I wouldn't see the point of discussing this point,
because we would be describing two different languages.

co'o mi'e xorxes