Etymological fallacy

Official website announcements are posted in this forum.

If you have questions, suggestions, or need support or help with anything, please email [email protected].
Deleet
Posts: 63
Joined: June 12th, 2012, 5:04 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Norman Swartz
Location: Denmark, Århus
Contact:

Etymological fallacy

Post by Deleet »

Philosophy Defined

Philosophy consists of the contemplative investigation of the most fundamental aspects of existence, life, knowledge, and value. Philosophy concerns itself with how to live one's life (ethics), what one knows, can know, and how one knows it (epistemology), and what can be said to exist (metaphysics).

The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom. So a philosopher is literally a lover of wisdom.
This quote is from the front of the website. It contains an unsound argument. A charitable interpretation is something like:
  • 1. The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom.
  • 2. If the word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom, then the word philosopher means a lover of wisdom.
  • Thus, 3. The word philosopher means a lover of wisdom.
One can exchange (2) for some other more general premise, where (1) is just a specific case. When one does, it becomes plainly obvious that the premise is false.

In the simplest case where a word W1 in a language L1 comes from a single word W2 in an another language L2, and W2 means X in L2, it might not be the case that W1 means X in L1. This is also true for words that have multiple parts (morphemes).

I would link to further support for this, but new users cannot post links. The interested user may google "fallacy files etymological fallacy", or use some other source of known fallacies like Wikipedia.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Spectrum »

Note Nietzsche's aversion for formal logic,
There is the idea that logical inference has a use as a tool for human survival, but that its existence does not support the existence of truth, nor does it have a reality beyond the instrumental:
Logic, too, also rests on assumptions that do not correspond to anything in the real world.
-Nietzsche, 1878, Human, All Too Human -11




Logical fallacies are only guidelines and as such are not immutable laws in philosophy.
Logic is not grounded on ultimate reality, and to be dogmatic on it rules as above OP is veering further from reality.

The etymological fallacy may be applicable in certain specific cases, but it is definitely counter-productive to use it and restraint the definition of 'philosophy' as 'love of wisdom'.

The all-encompassing definition of 'philosophy' should be 'love of wisdom' retracing to its etymological roots from the hermeneutics and descontructive perspective.
Then we clarify 'love' as an inclination, move and drive (not obsession) towards wisdom.

Wisdom is knowledge (theoretical, practical, intuitive, etc) plus experience applied via various tools towards dynamic optimality of life. This aspect of wisdom will cover the various knowledge (sciences, arts, etc,),, schools(Eastern, Western, others) branches(ethics, epistemology, metaphysics), and tools (concepts, lingustics, logic, analysis, synthesis, etc.) used in the various sub-sets of philosophy.

Philosophy as 'love of wisdom' and its sub-definitions, can be justified by induction from its practice an understanding of it from all over the world, btw, not just Western academics.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13818
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Belinda »

Deleet wrote:
This quote is from the front of the website. It contains an unsound argument. A charitable interpretation is something like: •1. The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom. •2. If the word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom, then the word philosopher means a lover of wisdom. •Thus, 3. The word philosopher means a lover of wisdom.
The material referred to is not an argument but a potted explanation that newcomers would find helpful. The meaning of'philosophy ' has changed over the centuries but 'lover of wisdom' fits pretty well the historical and the present usages.

The uses of etymology are with historical research, true, but as I said the explanation is not trying to define philosophy unless the reader has the habit of accepting everything said or written as definitive.
Socialist
hilda

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by hilda »

"Philosophy" is just a word. I mean, call them Arseholes (as mad as Nietzsche); viz Arseholia, hence "Nietzsche was a typical arsehole" in the sense that all arseholes are predisposed to argue that they themselves are not contemptible by virtue of nihilsm; nothing could be of any value and thereby nothing could (actually) be contemptible.
Deleet
Posts: 63
Joined: June 12th, 2012, 5:04 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Norman Swartz
Location: Denmark, Århus
Contact:

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Deleet »

Spectrum wrote:Note Nietzsche's aversion for formal logic,
There is the idea that logical inference has a use as a tool for human survival, but that its existence does not support the existence of truth, nor does it have a reality beyond the instrumental:
Logic, too, also rests on assumptions that do not correspond to anything in the real world.
-Nietzsche, 1878, Human, All Too Human -11




Logical fallacies are only guidelines and as such are not immutable laws in philosophy.
Logic is not grounded on ultimate reality, and to be dogmatic on it rules as above OP is veering further from reality.

The etymological fallacy may be applicable in certain specific cases, but it is definitely counter-productive to use it and restraint the definition of 'philosophy' as 'love of wisdom'.

The all-encompassing definition of 'philosophy' should be 'love of wisdom' retracing to its etymological roots from the hermeneutics and descontructive perspective.
Then we clarify 'love' as an inclination, move and drive (not obsession) towards wisdom.

Wisdom is knowledge (theoretical, practical, intuitive, etc) plus experience applied via various tools towards dynamic optimality of life. This aspect of wisdom will cover the various knowledge (sciences, arts, etc,),, schools(Eastern, Western, others) branches(ethics, epistemology, metaphysics), and tools (concepts, lingustics, logic, analysis, synthesis, etc.) used in the various sub-sets of philosophy.

Philosophy as 'love of wisdom' and its sub-definitions, can be justified by induction from its practice an understanding of it from all over the world, btw, not just Western academics.
Please never reply to me again with anything continental. Also, Nietzsche is meh.

-- Updated June 13th, 2012, 8:44 am to add the following --
Belinda wrote:Deleet wrote:
This quote is from the front of the website. It contains an unsound argument. A charitable interpretation is something like: •1. The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom. •2. If the word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom, then the word philosopher means a lover of wisdom. •Thus, 3. The word philosopher means a lover of wisdom.
The material referred to is not an argument but a potted explanation that newcomers would find helpful. The meaning of'philosophy ' has changed over the centuries but 'lover of wisdom' fits pretty well the historical and the present usages.

The uses of etymology are with historical research, true, but as I said the explanation is not trying to define philosophy unless the reader has the habit of accepting everything said or written as definitive.
It is an argument, as indicated by the argument indicator word "so", which indicates an inference.

And no, "lover of wisdom" does not fit with current usage of "philosopher" for the most part. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier.
XavierAlex
Posts: 307
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 10:56 am

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by XavierAlex »

Deleet wrote: And no, "lover of wisdom" does not fit with current usage of "philosopher" for the most part. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier.
I think I agree with your points: Etymological fallacy; however, this quote is your flaw. "A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier."

Does this mean: Philosophy does someone who is a philosopher. It may not mean "lover of wisdom." But I think the question still remains, because, while philosophy may be a study or discipline using rational arguments, what are the confines in a rational argument? What if someone strays too far? Is it no longer philosophy? Should it strictly adhere to rules, laws, guidelines? If not, then what better definition for philosophy than X or an arbitrary phrase?

If cultures continue to use a phrase or word to DESCRIBE something, then it is so. "Lover of Wisdom" may not be a direct logical and linguistic connection, but if the culture of philosophy/ers use it to designate their "study," then why not?
Deleet
Posts: 63
Joined: June 12th, 2012, 5:04 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Norman Swartz
Location: Denmark, Århus
Contact:

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Deleet »

Deleet wrote: And no, "lover of wisdom" does not fit with current usage of "philosopher" for the most part. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier.
XavierAlex wrote:I think I agree with your points: Etymological fallacy; however, this quote is your flaw. "A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier."

Does this mean: Philosophy does someone who is a philosopher. It may not mean "lover of wisdom." But I think the question still remains, because, while philosophy may be a study or discipline using rational arguments, what are the confines in a rational argument? What if someone strays too far? Is it no longer philosophy? Should it strictly adhere to rules, laws, guidelines? If not, then what better definition for philosophy than X or an arbitrary phrase?
1) The marked sentence seems meaningless or at least very strange, and I don't know what you meant. Rephrase?

2) I did not mention anything about rational arguments. In fact, this post was the only post in this thread to use the word "rational".

3) I don't understand the last question.
If cultures continue to use a phrase or word to DESCRIBE something, then it is so. "Lover of Wisdom" may not be a direct logical and linguistic connection, but if the culture of philosophy/ers use it to designate their "study," then why not?
I don't know what you mean. Clarify?
XavierAlex
Posts: 307
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 10:56 am

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by XavierAlex »

1. "A philosopher cannot "do" philosophy--was the point. Philosophy is abstract in nature. It's like saying, a deconstructionist does deconstructionism.

2. Well, the use of philosophy is the use of rational arguments, per se. And this was again about distinguishing philosophy from "other things".

3. The last question leading to the next paragraph, I think, tried to show that what to define philosophy in common terms and contemporary terms is shown that it is cultural. "Lover of wisdom" may not be logically or linguistically be connected to philo and sophia; however, if it fits and describes, if it coins the term in Western and other civilization, then "lover of wisdom" is as good a definition as audiophile is to "lover of music."
Deleet
Posts: 63
Joined: June 12th, 2012, 5:04 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Norman Swartz
Location: Denmark, Århus
Contact:

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Deleet »

XavierAlex wrote:1. "A philosopher cannot "do" philosophy--was the point. Philosophy is abstract in nature. It's like saying, a deconstructionist does deconstructionism.
I think both of those are correct. If you don't like that phrasing, then just use something like "philosopher" =df "someone who philosophizes".
2. Well, the use of philosophy is the use of rational arguments, per se. And this was again about distinguishing philosophy from "other things".

3. The last question leading to the next paragraph, I think, tried to show that what to define philosophy in common terms and contemporary terms is shown that it is cultural. "Lover of wisdom" may not be logically or linguistically be connected to philo and sophia; however, if it fits and describes, if it coins the term in Western and other civilization, then "lover of wisdom" is as good a definition as audiophile is to "lover of music."
I still don't know what you mean. Grammar seems to be off with the first sentence in part 3.

"lover of wisdom" does not fit and describe philosophers. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy (or whatever similar definition that you prefer).

"audiophile" does not mean "lover of music" (or sound). The first useful definition I found via Google on Wikipedia is An audiophile is a person with a strong interest in high-quality sound (usually music) reproduction. This seems right. I am a audiophile and own expensive high-fidelity equipment etc.
User avatar
Cleft
New Trial Member
Posts: 9
Joined: May 6th, 2012, 11:18 am

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Cleft »

XavierAlex wrote:1. "A philosopher cannot "do" philosophy--was the point. Philosophy is abstract in nature. It's like saying, a deconstructionist does deconstructionism.

2. Well, the use of philosophy is the use of rational arguments, per se. And this was again about distinguishing philosophy from "other things".

3. The last question leading to the next paragraph, I think, tried to show that what to define philosophy in common terms and contemporary terms is shown that it is cultural. "Lover of wisdom" may not be logically or linguistically be connected to philo and sophia; however, if it fits and describes, if it coins the term in Western and other civilization, then "lover of wisdom" is as good a definition as audiophile is to "lover of music."
I think, and Deleet already wrote that, I'm just trying to help - that you fail to distinguish between - the love for wisdom (or better - loving wisdom, as an act) and the act of actually doing philosophy. Meaning, philosopher (by definition) is someone who does philosophy. If you think, that doing philosophy = loving wisdom - fine, that's how you subjectively define the term. Most of the world, however, define it differently, and you should accept that.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Spectrum »

Deleet wrote:
Spectrum wrote:Note Nietzsche's aversion for formal logic,





Logical fallacies are only guidelines and as such are not immutable laws in philosophy.
Logic is not grounded on ultimate reality, and to be dogmatic on it rules as above OP is veering further from reality.

The etymological fallacy may be applicable in certain specific cases, but it is definitely counter-productive to use it and restraint the definition of 'philosophy' as 'love of wisdom'.

The all-encompassing definition of 'philosophy' should be 'love of wisdom' retracing to its etymological roots from the hermeneutics and descontructive perspective.
Then we clarify 'love' as an inclination, move and drive (not obsession) towards wisdom.

Wisdom is knowledge (theoretical, practical, intuitive, etc) plus experience applied via various tools towards dynamic optimality of life. This aspect of wisdom will cover the various knowledge (sciences, arts, etc,),, schools(Eastern, Western, others) branches(ethics, epistemology, metaphysics), and tools (concepts, lingustics, logic, analysis, synthesis, etc.) used in the various sub-sets of philosophy.

Philosophy as 'love of wisdom' and its sub-definitions, can be justified by induction from its practice an understanding of it from all over the world, btw, not just Western academics.
Please never reply to me again with anything continental. Also, Nietzsche is meh.
Bigotry is not philosophy. No wonder.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Prismatic
Posts: 514
Joined: April 22nd, 2012, 4:30 pm
Favorite Philosopher: John Stuart Mill

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Prismatic »

Deleet wrote:
Philosophy Defined

Philosophy consists of the contemplative investigation of the most fundamental aspects of existence, life, knowledge, and value. Philosophy concerns itself with how to live one's life (ethics), what one knows, can know, and how one knows it (epistemology), and what can be said to exist (metaphysics).

The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philos, meaning love/affinity/friendship, and the Greek word sophia, meaning wisdom. So a philosopher is literally a lover of wisdom.
Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon defines the Greek word philosophia as: "love of knowledge and wisdom, fondness for studious pursuits, 2. the systematic treatment of a subject. 3 philosophy."

It also lists the Greek word philosophos and gives its etymology as philos + sophia, defining it as "lover of wisdom or knowledge, first used by Pythagoras, who called himself, philosophos, a lover of wisdom," in contrast to the term sophos, a sage.

That seems to be more than sufficient evidence for the definition and the etymology given on the website.
Everywhere I have sought peace and never found it except in a corner with a book. —Thomas à Kempis
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13818
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Belinda »

It is an argument, as indicated by the argument indicator word "so", which indicates an inference.

And no, "lover of wisdom" does not fit with current usage of "philosopher" for the most part. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier.
While the OP seeks the logical inference of the literal reading, I prefer to interpret according to the social use of the introduction.
Socialist
Deleet
Posts: 63
Joined: June 12th, 2012, 5:04 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Norman Swartz
Location: Denmark, Århus
Contact:

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Deleet »

Prismatic wrote:
Deleet wrote:
Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon defines the Greek word philosophia as: "love of knowledge and wisdom, fondness for studious pursuits, 2. the systematic treatment of a subject. 3 philosophy."

It also lists the Greek word philosophos and gives its etymology as philos + sophia, defining it as "lover of wisdom or knowledge, first used by Pythagoras, who called himself, philosophos, a lover of wisdom," in contrast to the term sophos, a sage.

That seems to be more than sufficient evidence for the definition and the etymology given on the website.
No one disputes the meaning of the Greek words. Nothing you have written is inconsistent with what I claimed.

-- Updated June 14th, 2012, 7:22 am to add the following --
Belinda wrote:
It is an argument, as indicated by the argument indicator word "so", which indicates an inference.

And no, "lover of wisdom" does not fit with current usage of "philosopher" for the most part. A philosopher is someone who does philosophy. And philosophy is roughly what I wrote earlier.
While the OP seeks the logical inference of the literal reading, I prefer to interpret according to the social use of the introduction.
Supposing that one uses the bad interpretation that it isn't an argument. Then there is still a wrong claim, but now it is without support.
User avatar
Prismatic
Posts: 514
Joined: April 22nd, 2012, 4:30 pm
Favorite Philosopher: John Stuart Mill

Re: Etymological fallacy

Post by Prismatic »

Deleet wrote: No one disputes the meaning of the Greek words. Nothing you have written is inconsistent with what I claimed.
It seems to be—in the first use of the word philosophos by Pythagoras. Perhaps you can clarify your claim a bit. It certainly doesn't appear that the etymology is false. Perhaps you only meant that the general principle of assigning an etymology based on the roots of portions of words is not a reliable method, although it is valid in this particular case. Is that it?
Everywhere I have sought peace and never found it except in a corner with a book. —Thomas à Kempis
Post Reply

Return to “Forum Announcements”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021