Re: Trivalent logic in Aymara?

On 16 Jun 99, at 20:00, FFlores wrote:

> Kristian Jensen <kljensen@...> wrote:
> >
> > Since bivalent logic has the true/false opposition, I take it that a
> > trivalent logic must be something like true/unconfirmed/false. With
> > that as my understanding of what trivalent logic means, I take it
> > that what Aymara really has is a logical category of irrealis -
> > making no assertion as to the validity of a specific event or state
> > of affairs.
> >
> > Consider modal categories (realis vs irrealis) together with the
> > negative below, and we get a trivalent logic, right?:
> >
> > Realis:   Strongly asserting that a specific event or state of
> >           affairs has actually happened or holds true.
> > Irrealis: Making _no_ assertion whatsoever that an actual event
> >           or state of affairs actually happened or holds true.
> > Negative: Asserting that events or state of affairs do _not_
> >           hold.
> >
> > Is that what is meant by trivalent logic?
>
> Fascinating! I hadn't thought of it. It *is* really alien to
> Western culture; we usually assert things or negate them. Even
> if we express a doubt, we have to use periphrasis which don't
> convey the exact meaning (using verbs like "doubt" or "suppose").
>
> On a different topic, do you (anybody) know anything
> about trivalent logic that parallels Boole's Laws?
Well, let's try the "and" function.

a   b   a && b
T   T     T
T   F     F
F   T     F
F   F     F

That is, a && b is true only if both a and b are
true.  Now, with three-valued logic, M = maybe
true, maybe false

a  b   a && b
T   T     T
T   F     F
T   M     M
F   T     F
F   M     M
M   M     M
M   T     M
M   F     M
F   F     F



Jim Henry III
Jim.Henry@pobox.com
http://www.pobox.com/~jim.henry/gzb/gzb.htm
*gjax zaxnq-box baxm-box goq.