RT list: Foolosopher and Linguist

S. Chapman was wondering when titling his book, "Grice: Philosopher and
Linguist" about the connotations of 'linguist'. I will wonder about the
connotation of 'philosopher', which for the purposes of this note, I will spell,
'foolosopher'.
 
So here I am reading Carston (2009: 54)
 
      "It cannot be claimed that we have yet found a foolproof
       criterion that can be applied satisfactorily across all cases"
 
And that is exactly right! I like the honest, good (non-academic?) talk,
'foolproof'! (As much as Carston's use of 'knock-down arguments' alla Alice's
 glories).
 
For who _wants_ a foolproof criterion?
 
Answer: A foolosopher (if not linguist)
 
The OED notes that one has to distinguish between 'fool' and 'idiot'.
"foolproof" the OED -- and what can be more English than that to _know_ -- notes
 it's an Americanism:

1902 A. C. HARMSWORTH et al. Motors 309
 
The car..is comparatively ‘fool-proof’.
 
This above should not count as it's 'scare quoted'.
 
1904 Westm. Gaz. 24 Oct. 2/2
 
The car is so ‘simple’ that my daughters drive it‘fool~proof’ the
Americans call it.
 
--- while I rather ride the horse? (I dislike the implicature of 'dohta:')
 
1926 W. R. INGE Lay Thoughts 220
 
Everywhere we find the same demand to make life easy, safe, and fool-proof.
 
 
 --- but I claim, not PRAGMATICS! pleaazzee!
 
 
1928 GALSWORTHY Swan Song III. ii. 231
 
A base of operations with a fool~proof title was essential.
 
1960 Farmer & Stockbreeder 19 Jan. (Suppl.) 37/2
 
It should be as foolproof and as easy to manage as possible, even to the
most amateur poultry keeper.
 
-- Well, this may compare to Horn's 'garden variety' which the OED traces
to 'a common or garden _hen_.' (Who keeps hens in gardens? -- or should I
_disimplicate_?)
 
1968 Times 24 Oct. 7/7
 
The cost of making nuclear reactors absolutely foolproof would outweigh
their economic advantages.
 
         -- some nuclear deterrence!

Now, for the foolosopher:
 
1549 CHALONER Erasm. Moriæ Enc. Aiij,
 
Suche men..that in deede are archdoltes, and woulde be taken yet for sages
and philosophers, maie I not aptely calle theim foolelosophers.
 
 
Exactly -- for as R. Caston notes, philosophers (who like a red pillar-box
-- never mind double decker who are usually _dirty_! and do not seem red to
me!) like a _true_ analysis (a truth-conditional one -- one should explore
this bit of philosophical jargon which I'd claim it's Wittgensteinian in
nature -- and thus to be avoided like the rats! -- just joking).
 
 
c1600 Timon v. v. (1842) 94
 
What, stand yee idle, my fooleosophers [printed foolc-]?
 
1694 ECHARD Plautus 197 A fine foolosopher!

---- if slightly futilitarian -- cfr. Grice on Bergman on the English
futilitarians -- such as Austin and Grice were.
 
1592 GREENE Def. Conny Catch. To Rdr. Wks. (Grosart) XI. 43
 
That quaint and mysticall forme of Foolosophie.
 
1617 S. COLLINS Def. Bp. Ely II. vi. §23. 241
 
Fine phoolosophyes.
 
 
   -- _too_ fine, if you ask me, when I think of those heterodoxical 'soi
disant' Jesuits and the theories of mental restriction. As my mother says,
"Next you'll be wondering how many angels can sit on the head of a needle".
 
Now, I don't _do_ 'fool'. I do 'idiot'. Aristotle had a problem with
'idiots'. The root, 'idio-' is indeed used by Grice ("Suppose I were to lie in
the tub re-writing the High-Way Code; wouldn't _that_ be idiosyncratic" -- or
 words to that effect, WoW vi).
 
And indeed the OED cross-references the fool and the idiot. The idiot is
not necessarily a fool. And Cicero, who wasn't either, was possibly right in
translating Greek 'idion' as 'proprium'. A 'proper property' in
Aristotelian parlance would be an 'idiocy'. But let's check with the OED. Is
idiot-proof perhaps _too_ strong?
 
1977 Economist 8 Oct. 90/2
 
Viewdata's image could be bungled if the equipment proves not to be
idiot-proof.
 
       I think 'bungle' incorporates negation, which confuses me.
 
1985 McGraw-Hill's Biotechnol. Newswatch V. 21/2,
 
I hate to use the term ‘idiot-proof’,..but our end-users for this assay
are not technically trained.
 
--- I love that, because I have found myself using the term 'idiot-proof'
too, to no avail, though. And while the utterer of that quote may be said to
 HATE to *use* the term 'idiot-proof', that's surely no indication that he
explicates he is not "ready" (to use it!)
 
Cheers,
 
JL Speranza
       author of "H. P. Grice and Duns Scotus -- the haecceity of the
indexical thought" -- repr. in Foolscap.
       Fooleries.
 
 
 
**************Dell Summer Savings: Cool Deals on Popular Laptops – Shop
Now!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222696924x1201468348/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D1)
Received on Fri Jul 3 00:10:59 2009