Re: Philosophy

[Esteban Flamini <eflamini@UNS.EDU.AR>]

This posting is intended as a contribution to the discussion on the
translation of "philosophy" and "philosopher". I apologize myself for any
mistake or misunderstanding of Lojban grammar it might contain (I'm a newcomer).

So far the following brivla have been proposed:

lezu'o pijysisku (by Mark Vines): activity of seeking wisdom
kampijyske (by Jorge Llambias): science of wisdom
ci'erkemsibdau (by John Cowan): discussion of ideas and arguments
tadnytadni (by Lee Daniel Crocker): study of fields of study

All of these are good. For the first, I think it would be clearer, and
closer to what I suppose to be Mark's intention, to say "zazpijysisku",
seeking the *state* of being wise.

The second tells us that philosophy is a kind of science (at least in a
broad sense) and it has something to do with wisdom. I think someone hearing
this word for the first time would infer the right meaning, provided s/he
knows the etymology of "philosophy" ("sophia" means wisdom). So, if
understandability (does this word exist in English?) is the criterion by
which a lujvo is judged, I really think "kampijyske" is the best.

Both of them are metaphors, not definitions. The other two try to translate
philosophy by defining it, something that not even the philosophers have
quite done. As for "tadnytadni", I think a logician or philosopher of
science would agree with it, but maybe an ethicist or an estheticist would not.

Another way to translate this words (one that I think no one tried yet)
would be to create a fu'ivla (borrowing) instead of a lujvo. So I propose (I
hope I'm respecting fu'ivla morphology):

prenfilsofi: x1 is a philosopher
tadnyfilsofi or saskyfilsofi: x1 is [a] philosophy

I think this words, or any other fu'ivla of this kind will be understood at
first hearing. After all, "philosophy" is a technical term borrowed from
Greek into most languages (I wonder how is "philosophy" translated into
Chinese).

If you like this idea, stop reading now. If you prefer a full lojban word
for "philosophy" and none of the four above lujvo looks convincing to you, I
have my own proposal. BTW, looking for my lujvo I reminded that in natural
languages words like "philosophy" show the so-called "process/product
ambiguity".

Suppose you want to say in Lojban the following sentence:

"Socrates is a philosopher"

How would you do? First of all, a philosopher is some kind of thinker, so
you can say:

"la SOkrates. pensi"

But not any kind of thinker, but one whose job (jibri) is thinking, so

"la SOkrates. jibri pensi"

or maybe

"la SOkrates. pensi se jibri" (Socrates' occupation is thinking; Socrates is
an intellectual. Right?)

I'm assuming that jibri counts for any kind of regular occupation, whether
paid or not (BTW: is 'se jibri' a good translation for 'proffesional'? What
do you think?)

Now, a mathematician is a proffesional thinker too, and so is a historian.
What kind of proffesional thinker is a philosopher? I'd say, one who thinks
about general principles (jicmu), so it could be expressed

"la SOkrates. jicmu pensi se jibri"

So, we could coin for "philosopher" the following lujvo:

cmupeiseljibri: jicmu+pensi+se+jibri:
$jibri2=$pensi1 is a philosopher, (who works on subject $pensi2=$jicmu1)

and I'm not sure whether or not I should include more arguments.

Now "se cmupeiseljibri" is any subject of philosophical inquiry.

Look at these statements:

"Philosophy is the seeking of wisdom"
"Kant's philosophy is very interesting"

In the first case "philosophy" refers to an activity, but in the second case
it refers to a/the product of this activity (a corpus of doctrine, maybe a
set of statements). This is called "process/product ambiguity" (I don't
remember who introduced the term). Moreover, every name of a science shows
this ambiguity (so, we should be careful when making lujvo for them). Now,
look at

"Philosophy embraces logic, ethics, metaphysics..."

Here "philosophy" has -I think- yet a third meaning, namely, one of a field
of study (not a corpus, but kind of a potential playroom for building a
corpus within it, if you like the metaphor).

Natural languages are apparently bound to these kind of ambiguities, but it
seems that in Lojban you should keep each meaning separate. So (this is the
moral) if you should speak Lojban you'll face questions you are probably not
even aware when speaking your native tongue.

Well, everything which is a subject of philosophical study is "se
cmupeiseljibri", so the whole field of study should be "loi se
cmupeiseljibri" or "lo'i se cmupeiseljibri" (I'm not sure which of them).

Philosophy as an activity is "zu'o cmupeiseljibri", isn't it? I.e., that
what philosophers do.

And as a corpus, I think it's a kind of achievement, so it should be "mu'e
cmupeiseljibri".

Alternatively, we can add a third place to "cmupeiseljibri": the
system/doctrine/works of the philosopher; so "philosophy" as a corpus could
be "loi/lo'i te cmupeiseljibri".

Now:

le zu'o cmupeiseljibri cu le nu sisku le za'i prije
Philosophy is the seeking of wisdom

lo'i mu'e cmupeiseljibri la kant. cu mutce ka cinri
Kant's philosophy is very interesting

loi se cmupeiseljibri cu ... (and please don't ask me to fill in the dots!) ;-)
Philosophy embraces logic, etc.

I will be grateful to any criticism to these ideas.

co'o mi'e .esteban.
---------------
Esteban Flamini
(BTW: I'm an undergraduate student of... philosophy)