From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:48:56 2010
Return-Path: <LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI
Received: (qmail 22895 invoked from network); 4 Apr 1997 20:52:18 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6)
  by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 4 Apr 1997 20:52:18 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <6.4FAE3E71@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 22:52:18 +0100
Date:         Fri, 4 Apr 1997 14:48:36 -0600
Reply-To:     mark.vines@wholefoods.com
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Mark Vines <vinesm@WHOLEFOODS.COM>
Subject:      CPE: Corliss Lamont
X-To:         LOJBAN@CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1870
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <IkSIlkERxSO.A.cGH.Yx0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

coidoi lobypli

I seek Lojban equivalents for the following:

+ syllogism
+ mortal
+ immortal
+ philosophy
+ personality
+ soul
+ hypothesis
+
+ All men are mortal.
+ Socrates is a man.
+ Therefore Socrates is mortal.

in order to translate the opening words of
_The Illusion of Immortality_ by Corliss Lamont.

Thus far I've managed:

+ syllogism = le cmulojmo'a
+ mortal = cu mrobi'o
+ immortal = cu vi'orji'e
+ philosophy = lezu'o pijysisku
+ personality = le prekai
+ soul = le ruxyse'i
+ hypothesis = le skecipsmadi
+
+ All men are mortal
+ = .i ro le remna cu mrobi'o
+ Socrates is a man.
+ = .i la SOkrates. cu remna
+ Therefore Socrates is mortal.
+ = .i la SOkrates. seni'i cu mrobi'o

but I feel pretty dubious about several of
these, especially {cmulojmo'a} & my use of
{seni'i}.

Here's the passage I hope to learn from
translating:

> "All men are mortal" begins the most famous
> of all syllogisms, and it proceeds to tell
> us that "Socrates is a man" and "therefore
> Socrates is mortal."  The branch of philosophy
> known as logic has made much of this syllogism
> as an example of perfect reasoning; what is
> more significant is the prodigious amount of
> time and energy which philosophy as a whole
> has spent on inquiring into its true and
> complete meaning.  On that meaning have been
> thought to hang the destiny of man, the fate
> of nations and even the existence of God.
> The real question has been:  How seriously
> are we to take the proposition that men and
> Socrates are mortal?  For there exists a
> well-known counter-proposition to the effect
> that men and Socrates are _im_mortal; or at
> least that what we call their personalities
> or souls are immortal.  In fact, Socrates
> himself, if the _Dialogues_ of Plato are to
> be trusted, was one of the first to advance
> the hypothesis of the soul's immortality.

co'imi'e markl.