On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 23:27, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 6/2/2020 4:15 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > On 6/2/2020 10:53 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> This topic has been bugging me ever since some recent CFJ
> >> discussion(s) (don't remember which) in which
On 6/2/2020 4:15 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On 6/2/2020 10:53 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
>> This topic has been bugging me ever since some recent CFJ
>> discussion(s) (don't remember which) in which authorial intent was
>> dismissed as irrelevant to the meaning of the rules,
On 6/2/2020 10:53 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> This topic has been bugging me ever since some recent CFJ
> discussion(s) (don't remember which) in which authorial intent was
> dismissed as irrelevant to the meaning of the rules, because it's not
> explicitly mentioned in R217. I
> Because what makes a judgement "appropriate" as per R591 is its specific
> relationship to the statement, not the intended statement.
>
> -G.
I was wondering whether evidence of the author's intention can affect
the meaning of a statement.
I'm pretty sure the meaning of a statement can depend
> > Keep in mind that word choice, even where it's synonymous in a vacuum,
> > conveys
> > meaning. This is a feature of language, we unconsciously assume speakers are
> > efficient and pragmatic and when expectations are broken it conveys
> > additional
> > meaning. You used "if and only if"
(oops sent this straight to falsifian the first time.)
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, June 1, 2020 10:05 PM, nch wrote:
> On Monday, June 1, 2020 9:44:27 PM CDT you wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 01:57, nch via agora-discussion
> > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org wrote:
> >
> >
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 01:57, nch via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:46:09 PM CDT James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> >
> > Isn't that still a difference in intended meaning? Maybe I didn't
> > phrase it clearly enough the first time, but my intended meaning was
> >
On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:56:35 PM CDT nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:46:09 PM CDT James Cook via agora-discussion
wrote:
> > Isn't that still a difference in intended meaning? Maybe I didn't
> > phrase it clearly enough the first time, but my intended meaning was
> >
On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:46:09 PM CDT James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
>
> Isn't that still a difference in intended meaning? Maybe I didn't
> phrase it clearly enough the first time, but my intended meaning was
> "Right now at the moment I'm calling this CFJ, the truth value
>
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 01:35, nch via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:23:42 PM CDT James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 19:29, nch via agora-business
> >
> > wrote:
> > > On Sunday, May 31, 2020 2:06:51 PM CDT Kerim Aydin via agora-official
> > >
On 6/1/2020 6:23 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 19:29, nch via agora-business
> wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 31, 2020 2:06:51 PM CDT Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
>>> The below CFJ is 3837. I assign it to grok.
>>>
>>> status:
On Monday, June 1, 2020 8:23:42 PM CDT James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 19:29, nch via agora-business
>
> wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 31, 2020 2:06:51 PM CDT Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
> > > The below CFJ is 3837. I assign it to grok.
> > >
> > > status:
On Sun, May 31, 2020, 2:52 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 5/31/2020 12:39 PM, grok wrote:
> > On Sun, May 31, 2020, 2:35 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> On 5/31/2020 12:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, May 31, 2020 2:06:51 PM
On 5/31/2020 12:39 PM, grok wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2020, 2:35 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On 5/31/2020 12:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
>>> On Sunday, May 31, 2020 2:06:51 PM CDT Kerim Aydin wrote:
The below CFJ is 3837. I assign it to grok.
status:
14 matches
Mail list logo
