From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Sat Mar 6 22:49:01 2010 Reply-To: Steven Belknap Sender: Lojban list Date: Tue Apr 15 11:05:11 1997 From: Steven Belknap X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 5324 X-From-Space-Date: Tue Apr 15 11:05:11 1997 X-From-Space-Address: - Message-ID: >> If one wants to refer to the concept represented by the English >> word "philosophy", I would suggest resorting to a fu'ivla. Same goes for >> words like "communism". If you construct a lujvo for these words, they will >> be very new concepts, as much of their meaning resides in their historical >> and linguistic context. "Biology" or "Statistics" on the other hand, are >> self-correcting, and their essence ought be straightforwardly expressable >> in a lujvo. > >I see no difference at all between biology and philosophy in this >regard. "Life" is no more objective a concept than "consciousness", >but we all agree that what we call by those names exists, and we >generally agree on where to find it and how to identify when people >are studying one or the other. We may disagree on the details of >each field, but we know what things are biology and which philosophy. > Several lujvo or English glosses for lujvo have been proposed for philosophy. None of them seem to me to carry the essential idea of philosophy. This problem is reflected in the American Heritage English language definitions of philosophy: Helvetica1530,0022,D70Cphi*los*o*phy He= lvetica(fAmerican_Heritage_A=BEHelvetica-lAmerican_Heritag= e_A=C4HelveticasAmerican_Heritage_A2=FA= Helvetica-fAmerican_Heritage_= ATHelvetica) n. pl. 1530,0022,D70Cphi*los*o*phies Abbr. 1530,0022,D70Cphil. philos. 1. a. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline. b. The investigation of causes and laws underlying reality. c. A system of philosophical inquiry or demonstration. 2. Inquiry into the nature of things based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods. 3. The critique and analysis of fundamental beliefs as they come to be conceptualized and formulated. 4. The synthesis of all learning. 5. All learning except technical precepts and practical arts. 6. All the disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology. 7. The science comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology. 8. A system of motivating concepts or principles: the philosophy of a culture. 9. A basic theory; a viewpoint: an original philosophy of advertising. 10. The system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.=20 [ Middle English philosophie from Old French from Latin philosophia from Greek from philosophos lover of wisdom, philosopher; See 1530,0022,D70Cphilosopher ] These "definitions" are all over the map, and in my view reflect the common use of the word philosophy to mean "exactly what one wants it to mean, no more and no less." The meanings people attach to this word seem to me to be idiosyncratic, culturally dependent, and highly variable. The only American English words with more wiggle room than philosophy are "God" and "religion." Chinese philosophy is very different from American philosophy. Chinese biology and American biology converge to the same science, (with the expected disparity at the cutting edge, of course.) "That which ascends converges." Science ascends, philosophy does not-it flops about like a dying fish on top of a heap of the already dead, due to its=20 nonempirical nature. (Please, lets not get into logical positivism.)=20 The dictionaries also lack the definition which to my mind gets at the heart of what philosophy is: a misguided attempt to apply rational thinking to existential angst. Of course, perhaps there is an empirical philosophy which will someday rise from the mire like chemistry did from alchemy. I personally do not think so, but I suppose its possible. Certainly reading the writings of philosophers is a useful mental exercise, just as reading about the history of feudal societies, or the beliefs of the latest headcase cult is instructive. So I'm not saying the study of philosophy is not valuable. If you firmly believe that the concept "philosophy" can be translated into lojban lujvo, which do you prefer? I submit that you won't find any more satisfactory than the fu'ivla. Actually, philosophy seems to me to be a good example of why fu'ivla are important. Steven Belknap, M.D. Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria