Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>]

la .and di'e cusku
> Anyway, it seems to me as if you are getting distracted by some
> peculiar obsession about the word "true". When I use "true" in
> speaking of the true-x2 version of {djuno}, I use it in the same
> sense as is involved in the definition of cmavo like:
>   ja`a, na, ge, ga, go, gu, jei

For any expression f by a is true only if the metaphysics M used by a evaluates
 to true.  That is any expression is f is a function of M and M is a function of
 a: f (M (a)).

The important point to note that it is not possible for the expressor to change
 the metaphysics of a simple statement.  This is were 'jetnu' comes in.  'jetnu'
 provides an argument for a different metaphysics M' under which to evaluate f
 for it to be true.  So we have jetnu (f, M').  Note that M' is not necessarily
 dependent upon a.

> For example,
>
>      ko`a djuno le du`u ko`e mlatu
>
>would be truth-conditionally equivalent to
>
>      ge ko`e mlatu gi ko`a djuno le du`u ko`e mlatu

This is false.  Only 'djuno' is evaluated using the expressor metaphysics M (a).
  The 'du'u' subexpression does not need to be evaluated to determine if the
 knowee knows it, there must be only an epistemology to say how it is known.

> Anyway this complaint is unfair. The metaphysics by which ko`e in
> {ko`a djuno ko`e} is true is the same metaphysics by which {ko`a
> djuno ko`e} is true. In other words, "If X djuno Y then Y". If you
> get worried about "truth" then use logical connectives instead.

jetnu (Y, M') /=> Y (M (a))
An expression of Y is true by M' does not mean that I can say Y.

> I don't know what you understand by
> 1.     le du`u broda cu "true"
> but what *I* mean by "true" is something that would make (1)

Again, use jetnu (Y, M') to switch the metaphysics context from M (a).

> equivalent to (2).
> 2a.     ja`a broda
> 2b.     broda

This is broda (M (a)) and this is not the same as broda (M').

> You have in effect been saying that that {djuno} means
>    epistemology x4 convinces x1 that x2 is true of x3 by a certain
>      metaphysics, M

This is correct.  This still does not say that x2 is true nor is it necessary.

ni'oco'omi'e dn.