[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > > But last time it came up, the general view seemed to be that ka'e
> > > covers not all imaginable worlds but only worlds that are somehow
> > > potential alternatives to this one. That is, ka'e is taken to
> > > be equivalent to su'omu'ei, and {su'omu'ei broda} means something
> > > like "in some relevant worlds that are variants of this world but
> > > in which zo'e is the case, broda".
> > >
> > > So actually, yes McGovern was a ka'e, but Sherlock Holmes isn't
> > > and not all johannine nu are ka'e fasnu.
> >
> > No good! There is only one reality, all others are (equally) unreal.
> > President McGovern, Irish Socrates, and the one where I drank hot
> > chocolate last night are all equally false. The Verification Principle
> > shows this.
>
> Can the Verification Principle be verified? Or is it just meaningless?
Its presence can be verified if you design a test that determines if a
person is following it, and subject someone to it. However, you probably
meant to ask if the veracity of the principle could be tested or not. The
answer is no; it's a prescription for human behavior, or a definition of
the word "meaningful", not a statement about reality. However, "Pres.
McGovern is more real than Sherlock Holmes" purports to be a statement
about reality, but is actually meaningless.
--
// if (!terrorist)
// ignore ();
// else
collect_data ();