DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
On Jul 13, 2008, at 3:14 PM, ais523 wrote: I attempt to file a criminal CFJ against ais523 for violating rule 2149 for lying by incorrectly saying in this message that they failed to initiate a CFJ when they didn't, but fail. -- ais523 The pellet with the pestle has the vessel with the -- ah, never mind. - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr
DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
ais523 wrote: > I attempt to file a criminal CFJ against ais523 for violating rule 2149 > for lying by incorrectly saying in this message that they failed to > initiate a CFJ when they didn't, but fail. I'm interpreting this as failing due to ambiguity (Rules 1504 and 2208). Proto-Proposal: Long-term ambiguity considered harmful Create a rule titled "Long-term ambiguity considered harmful" with this text: A person acting to create an ambiguity in the gamestate SHOULD act to minimize the scope of the ambiguity. [Example: your message could have been followed by this text: "I retract any judicial cases previously initiated in this message. I initiate an inquiry case on the statement 'A criminal case was initiated in the same message in which this case was initiated.'"]
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
On Sunday 13 July 2008 03:26:01 pm ais523 wrote: > Clearly, I would only initiate a criminal CFJ against myself if I > had in fact committed the crime in question; therefore, I intended > to initiate the criminal CFJ if and only if my attempt to initiate > the CFJ did not fail, like I claimed, i.e. I intended to initiate > the CFJ if and only if I initiated the CFJ. > > Oh, and this little bit of confusion is designed as an exercise to > show the absurdity of finding speech acts to be lying. Note that R2149 requires not only that you not believe your statement to be false, but that you believe it to be true. Deliberately ambiguous or paradoxical statements are punishable under Agoran perjury law.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
ais523 wrote: >Oh, and this little bit of confusion is designed as an exercise to show >the absurdity of finding speech acts to be lying. It's not succeeding. I see no such absurdity. Your bizarre message, while of uncertain interpretation, did not challenge my concepts of truthfulness and speech acts. -zefram
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 21:11 +0100, Zefram wrote: > ais523 wrote: > >I attempt to > ... > >, but fail. > > I wonder whether this qualifies for acting by announcement. On the > face of it, this was not an announcement that ais523 did something, but > rather an announcement that e made a failed attempted to do something. > That doesn't meet the requirements of R478, so probably doesn't initiate > the CFJ. > > Then we must consider whether it was an *attempt* to initiate a CFJ > (as it claims). This depends on what ais523 thought would happen. > > -zefram Clearly, I would only initiate a criminal CFJ against myself if I had in fact committed the crime in question; therefore, I intended to initiate the criminal CFJ if and only if my attempt to initiate the CFJ did not fail, like I claimed, i.e. I intended to initiate the CFJ if and only if I initiated the CFJ. Oh, and this little bit of confusion is designed as an exercise to show the absurdity of finding speech acts to be lying. -- ais523
DIS: Re: BUS: Can you lie in a speech act?
ais523 wrote: >I attempt to ... >, but fail. I wonder whether this qualifies for acting by announcement. On the face of it, this was not an announcement that ais523 did something, but rather an announcement that e made a failed attempted to do something. That doesn't meet the requirements of R478, so probably doesn't initiate the CFJ. Then we must consider whether it was an *attempt* to initiate a CFJ (as it claims). This depends on what ais523 thought would happen. -zefram
