GEN-ANCIENT-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-ANCIENT > 2004-04 > 1082327527
From: "Phil Moody" <>
Subject: Re: [Gen-Ancient] Basques, indo-europeans, linguistics plus some comments on epistemology
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 17:33:26 -0500
References: <20040417235846.35802.qmail@web41710.mail.yahoo.com>
"Francisco Antonio Doria" wrote:
So you deny the indo-european hypothesis?
PLM: Like "Conjecture" - a "Hypothesis" offers an explanation to a particular
question, or problem, and as you state below "Absolute certainties do not
exist in science, not even in math" and the same is true of any discipline. I
believe etymology and Linguistic theories are even more prone to error due to
the constant evolution of the languages themselves, because the knowledge we
have today does not accurately define languages thousands of years in the
past. Are Linguists using a Dictionary of Basque written three thousand years
ago, or are they relying on the current vocabulary of the Basque people? The
latter almost certainly being the case; I would not have much faith in any
theory discussing the origin of the Basque Language. One only has to look at
how rapidly the English language has change in a much, much shorter time to
appreciate to appreciate the possible changes in the Basque Language, or Old
Norse, which is a highly debated field of study based on the assumption that
Old Icelandic is representative of this now dead language. So, rather than
accept any one theory as fact; I choose to keep an open mind and realize that
any particular hypothesis may be wrong, because I accept the possibility that
the conclusion may be adduced from erroneous information, or slanted logic.
The only flaw in my epistemological remarks that I can discern - is that I
have accepted the Hypothesis of the Authors of this Y DNA study as fact and
that I should be more reserved in my assertions, but if you have other grounds
you object to - please advise. First, let me reiterate the relevant assertions
put forward by the authors of this study:
"It should be noted that Basque-Celtic similarity not only implies that
Basque- and Celtic-speaking populations derive from common paternal ancestors,
but that genetic drift in these communities has not been sufficiently great to
differentiate them." End Quote
Granted, the AUTHORS (James F. Wilson,, Deborah A. Weiss, Martin Richards,
Mark G. Thomas, Neil Bradman, and David B. Goldstein,) may be misinterpreting
the results of their study, based on flawed samples, or poor methodology, but
I seriously doubt it. The advancement of Y DNA analysis has progressed to the
point, that I find it more reliable than any hypothetical Linguistic origin
for the diffusion of our species, because the Linguists have no extant records
of the various Languages from the Dawn of Mankind to base their suppositions
on; whereas Y DNA is far less mutable than Languages themselves. So, I choose
to give more weight to the empirical data in this Y DNA study, rather than
trust a hypothesis that is based upon no extant records.
So, hypothetically speaking, if the Basque and Celts derive from Common
Paternal Ancestors, as suggested in the Y DNA study, then how is my Logic
flawed in asserting that they at one time shared a Common Tongue? Would you
propose a more radical supposition? [NB: Thank you, Ford, for providing us
with a forum where we can amicably disagree with one another - without the
Rancor that is inherent in being linked to SGM!].
Best Wishes,
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Francisco Antonio Doria" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 6:58 PM
Subject: [Gen-Ancient] Basques, indo-europeans, linguistics plus some comments
on epistemology
>
> So you deny the indo-european hypothesis?
>
> I don't agree with you, especially with your
> epistemological remarks (see at the end of my text),
> but let me anyway restate my views:
>
> - Basque is unrelated to any indo-european language,
> to finno-ugric, ural-altaic, afro-asiatic, dravidic,
> or similar group. We can feel some i.-e. flavor in
> Etruscan (the -c copula, a sophisticated nominal
> flexion system, names for numbers 6 and 7), but Basque
> is too weird.
>
> - There were Alan migrations to Spain and Portugal (my
> mother's family pre-surname was precisely ``the
> Alans'' in the 10th and 11th century, and *that* is
> documented historical fact). Also the Visigoths in
> their long march to Spain and Portugal very likely
> went through the eastern Galicia. So, it appears
> plausible to relate these names, Iberia and Galicia,
> to those migrations.
>
> On your epistemological considerations. I have a
> friend, David Miller, who is a well-known British
> philosopher of science. He was a very close
> collaborator of Sir Karl Popper, and he once remarked
> *en passant* that the main gist of Sir Karl's
> falsifiability criterion for scientific hypotheses is
> that science is always subject to doubt. Absolute
> certainties do not exist in science, not even in math.
>
>
> I'll give you an example: in Dec 2003 I published a
> paper with a colleague on a major open question in
> computer science. The Journal of Symbolic Logic
> immediately reviewed it with highly unusual haste -
> they usually take years to publish reviews - and
> claimed that one of our conditions was wrong. We are
> now answering and rebutting the reviewer's assertion,
> but we know (for technical reasons) that any proof of
> the condition we used will require a so-called strong
> principle, which isn't unanimously accepted among
> mathematicians. So, even in math there is room for
> doubt...
>
> Please revise your epistemological tenets; allow me
> some frankness here - you do not seem to grasp the
> meaning of scientific practice and of scientific
> statements. Science is science because it can be
> doubted; it *is* to be doubted.
>
> Francisco Antonio Doria
>
> --- Phil Moody <> escreveu: >
> "Francisco Antonio Doria" wrote:
> >
This thread: