jbovlaste
a lojban dictionary editing system
User:
Pass:

Home
Get A Printable Dictionary
Search Best Words
Recent Changes
How You Can Help
valsi - All
valsi - Preferred Only
natlang - All
natlang - Preferred Only
Languages
XML Export
user Listing
Report Bugs
Utilities
Status
Help
Admin Request
Create Account
Discussion of "xumbe"
[parent] [root]
Comment #2: Re: in what way?
Curtis W Franks (Sat Apr 9 21:08:47 2016)

gleki wrote:
> you say "altered" and "in some way". But what is abnormal and by which
> standards?
>
> Coffee-drunk, tea-drunk, chocolate-drunk, drunk from lactose in milk ...
> Where is the border?
>
> As you say yourself brain produces similar substances anyway.
> So is "joyful from seeing a picture of Mona Lisa" an altered state?
>
> I'd rather use something like "x1 is in a state of mind x2 (property of
> x1)" ri'a (factors follow) and another word "x1 is tranquil (amotional

> state)".

I think that it is up to the context and the judgment of the utterer. I am
purposefully vague here.

This might be one of those "I know it when I see it" things. But, of
course, that is mever really good enough, objectively. There is always
uncertainty about the reliability of the judge (what are their rates for
false positives and false negatives, for example?). And different judges
may diagnose the same thing in different ways; even one judge may have
judgment vary based on context. And the process of judgment cannot be
exported/outsourced nor reproduced by objective, measurable standards of
hard-definition. Even if that is not necessary, lacking a hard definition
is unsatisfactory. But the intention of this word is to be flexible enough
to allow for all of these varied subjective definitions and judgments.

Comment #3: Re: in what way?
Curtis W Franks (Sat Apr 9 21:12:44 2016)

krtisfranks wrote:
> gleki wrote:
> > you say "altered" and "in some way". But what is abnormal and by which
> > standards?
> >
> > Coffee-drunk, tea-drunk, chocolate-drunk, drunk from lactose in milk
...
> > Where is the border?
> >
> > As you say yourself brain produces similar substances anyway.
> > So is "joyful from seeing a picture of Mona Lisa" an altered state?
> >
> > I'd rather use something like "x1 is in a state of mind x2 (property of

> > x1)" ri'a (factors follow) and another word "x1 is tranquil
(amotional
>
> > state)".
>
> I think that it is up to the context and the judgment of the utterer. I
am
> purposefully vague here.
>
> This might be one of those "I know it when I see it" things. But, of
> course, that is mever really good enough, objectively. There is always
> uncertainty about the reliability of the judge (what are their rates for
> false positives and false negatives, for example?). And different judges
> may diagnose the same thing in different ways; even one judge may have
> judgment vary based on context. And the process of judgment cannot be
> exported/outsourced nor reproduced by objective, measurable standards of
> hard-definition. Even if that is not necessary, lacking a hard definition

> is unsatisfactory. But the intention of this word is to be flexible
enough
> to allow for all of these varied subjective definitions and judgments.

In other words, the question is about where the judge decides to draw the
line. For example: If someone drinks one beer, are they drunk? It varies by
person, law, and other context. How about five beers in a short amount of
time?

Is alcohol content or concentration enough to make this call? A small
person will be affected differently from a big one. Likewise for varying
degrees of experience. And, of course, the drink itself has a far higher
alcohol concentration (although not necessarily content) than a human
drinker, but it is not drunk, since it does not have a brain. Does
drunkenness depend on behavior or physiological response?

Comment #4: Re: in what way?
gleki (Sun Apr 10 06:12:09 2016)

krtisfranks wrote:
> krtisfranks wrote:
> > gleki wrote:
> > > you say "altered" and "in some way". But what is abnormal and by
which
> > > standards?
> > >
> > > Coffee-drunk, tea-drunk, chocolate-drunk, drunk from lactose in milk
> ...
> > > Where is the border?
> > >
> > > As you say yourself brain produces similar substances anyway.
> > > So is "joyful from seeing a picture of Mona Lisa" an altered state?
> > >
> > > I'd rather use something like "x1 is in a state of mind x2 (property
of
>
> > > x1)" ri'a (factors follow) and another word "x1 is tranquil
> (amotional
> >
> > > state)".
> >
> > I think that it is up to the context and the judgment of the utterer. I

> am
> > purposefully vague here.
> >
> > This might be one of those "I know it when I see it" things. But, of
> > course, that is mever really good enough, objectively. There is always
> > uncertainty about the reliability of the judge (what are their rates
for
> > false positives and false negatives, for example?). And different
judges
> > may diagnose the same thing in different ways; even one judge may have
> > judgment vary based on context. And the process of judgment cannot be
> > exported/outsourced nor reproduced by objective, measurable standards
of
> > hard-definition. Even if that is not necessary, lacking a hard
definition
>
> > is unsatisfactory. But the intention of this word is to be flexible
> enough
> > to allow for all of these varied subjective definitions and judgments.
>
> In other words, the question is about where the judge decides to draw the

> line. For example: If someone drinks one beer, are they drunk? It varies
by
> person, law, and other context. How about five beers in a short amount of

> time?
>
> Is alcohol content or concentration enough to make this call? A small
> person will be affected differently from a big one. Likewise for varying
> degrees of experience. And, of course, the drink itself has a far higher
> alcohol concentration (although not necessarily content) than a human
> drinker, but it is not drunk, since it does not have a brain. Does
> drunkenness depend on behavior or physiological response?

I merely said that any state of mind can be altered, humans can't persist
in one state of mind for a long time. So maybe add "abnormal" or "medically
abnormal" or "partially unconscious" to the definition itself.

Comment #5: Re: in what way?
Curtis W Franks (Sun Apr 10 07:28:24 2016)

gleki wrote:
>
> I merely said that any state of mind can be altered, humans can't persist

> in one state of mind for a long time. So maybe add "abnormal" or
"medically
> abnormal" or "partially unconscious" to the definition itself.

I agree. It has been done.

Currently, jbovlaste will accept data for 69 languages.
You are not logged in.

  recent changes jbovlaste main
This is jbovlaste, the lojban dictionary system.
The main code was last changed on Wed 07 Oct 2020 05:54:55 PM PDT.
All content is public domain. By submitting content, you agree to place it in the public domain to the fullest extent allowed by local law.
jbovlaste is an official project of the logical language group, and is now headed by Robin Lee Powell.
E-mail him if you have any questions.
care to log in?