Trent Pehrson wrote:
> 1) Do you consider yourself a linguist?
I do.
> 2) Given only the following labels, which best describes linguistics
> as a discipline for you? (a) a scientific discipline (b) a philosophical
> discipline.
Obviously (a).
> 3) Given only the following definitions, which comes closest to
> describing the purpose of linguistics for you? (a) learning to speak many
> languages. (b) learning the structures of languages. (c) learning how
> language works in the human mind. (d) defining and cataloging languages.
> (e) defining language at large. (e) the humanistic study of language and
> literature.
(b) plus to some extent (c) and (d).
> 4) Do you consider yourself a scientist?
It depends on the definition of science and scientists. From my perspective,
hmm, yes. From the Western viewpoint, rather, no.
> 5) Given only the following definitions, which comes closest to
> describing the purpose of science for you? (a) the search for truth. (b)
> use of the scientific method to create theories by proving or disproving
> hypotheses (c) the process of discovering natural laws.
What the hell is 'scientific method'? I would expect (c).
> 6) Do you consider yourself a philosopher?
No.
> 7) Given only the following definitions, which comes closest to
> describing the purpose of philosophy for you? (a) the search for truth.
> (b) the pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
> (c) the study of the nature of reality based on logical reasoning rather
> than empirical methods. (d) a critical analysis of fundamental assumptions
> or beliefs. (e) a discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics,
> metaphysics, and epistemology.
More or less (d). I would eliminate the word 'critical'. In my eyes,
philosophy is a rational reflextion of a religious sense.
> Thanks.
You are welcome.
> Trent P.
Yitzik