Re: TECH: "philosophy" (was: toldi nunsenva)

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

mi'e .djan. .i la lojbab. cusku di'e

> There are two definitions of science that I have seen used by intellectuals.
> The one used by scientists usually relies on concepts like the scientific
> method, description, experimentation, etc.  Another definition, used by
> "non-scientists", and especially those in the humanities and sometimes
> the social sciences, is harder to define, but to seems to mean a large
> systematized body of knowledge or field of study.  i.e. it translates into
> what we might call an -ology.  It is not clear to me that no part
> of philosophy exists which qualifies
> as an -ology.  (I vaguely recall -ology has something to do with Greek
> "logos", which may or may not help my definitional efforts).

So it does: the question is, does "saske" mean specifically "science" Anglo-
American style, or is it more like German "Wissenschaft", which covers all
the fields of scholarly knowledge ("Naturwissenschaft" being the natural
sciences specifically, vs. "Geisteswissenschaft", where "Geist" = "spirit",
being what we usually call "the humanities")?

There is no doubt that philosophy is an ology (no leading hyphen needed).
Is "saske" wide enough to cover all the ologies?

--
John Cowan              sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
                e'osai ko sarji la lojban.