Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Tue, 19 Oct 1993 13:05:52 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Tue, 19 Oct 1993 13:05:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199310191705.AA01417@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7545; Tue, 19 Oct 93 13:03:47 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3591; Tue, 19 Oct 93 13:04:47 EDT Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1993 13:01:46 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: TECH: "philosophy" (was: toldi nunsenva) X-Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Tue Oct 19 09:01:46 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET I am undecided how broad is saske, though field of knowledge can also be covered as some lujvo of terdjuno. This is one of those philosophical meaning-of-words debates that I feel "Lojban Central" has no especial right to decide. The fine line between "science" and "ology" is too fine for me. Too many borderlines: what about applied sciences, social sciences, sciences like astronomy where experimentation isn't really possible, and the question of whether mathematics is a science (it has ALSO been called the 'mother of science'. But whatever it means, saske has a reasonably clear place structure and the general relationship among the places should be independent of the boundaries one selects. Since one of those places is a "methodology" place (x3), we can probably afford a broader definition that the American scientific community uses, but there has to be a systematic body of knowledge, a discrete bounded subject (i.e. something that can be described or labelled as a sumti) and a methodology. lojbab