FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-19-2002, 05:14 PM   #1
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: From:
Posts: 203
Post Language is negative.

I don't have the time to make this long and 'interesting' but

Language is not an advantage of humans. It slows down learning, complicates facts, arguments and communication. Creation/Evolution debates would be long over if people had a method of transferring thoughts instead of misunderstanding misquoting misreading and misrepresenting each other.

If you could absorb thoughts instead of complicating them with language, you could learn much closer to your intellectual capacity than with language.

Language is also a barrier between cultures: if the world didn't have hundreds of languages we would not create new and pointless fields of learning required only in order to communicate.

Without language, we would not get very far, but with something better, we would get much farther.
ishalon is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 05:38 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
Question

Hmm. Transferring thoughts. Why didn't I think of that?
Philosoft is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 05:41 PM   #3
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Post

Language has enabled humans to journey into regions of abstraction/abstract thought that are not available to our more limited cousins.

How could we transfer thoughts without some kind of common "language" to communicate and understand them with?

Contrary to being a hindrance, language enables, accelerates, and preserves learning. Without language, we (like chimps) would not have a huge volume of written history from which to draw, and would not have a vehicle to pass what we learn, in every subject, down to following generations.

The problem with a plurality of languages is not that they are languages but that there are more than one.
Mageth is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 05:43 PM   #4
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 279
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ishalon:
<strong>I don't have the time to make this long and 'interesting' but

Language is not an advantage of humans. It slows down learning, complicates facts, arguments and communication. Creation/Evolution debates would be long over if people had a method of transferring thoughts instead of misunderstanding misquoting misreading and misrepresenting each other.

If you could absorb thoughts instead of complicating them with language, you could learn much closer to your intellectual capacity than with language.

Language is also a barrier between cultures: if the world didn't have hundreds of languages we would not create new and pointless fields of learning required only in order to communicate.

Without language, we would not get very far, but with something better, we would get much farther.</strong>
Isn't that rather like saying 'without legs, we wouldn't get very far, but with the ability to teleport vast distances we'd get much farther'? i.e. obviously given any human ability one can imagine it being better, I don't see the point here?
Kachana is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 06:18 PM   #5
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 229
Post

ishalon....

It seems to me that language has two major functions: (1) to communicate thoughts with others; and (2) to express our thoughts. What gives you reason to believe this is not the case?

owleye
owleye is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 07:01 PM   #6
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: From:
Posts: 203
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Mageth:
<strong>Language has enabled humans to journey into regions of abstraction/abstract thought that are not available to our more limited cousins.
</strong>
and its now limiting us, i didnt do a good job writing it out

Quote:
<strong>
How could we transfer thoughts without some kind of common "language" to communicate and understand them with?
</strong>
If i knew i would be rich

Contrary to being a hindrance, language enables, accelerates, and preserves learning. Without language, we (like chimps) would not have a huge volume of written history from which to draw, and would not have a vehicle to pass what we learn, in every subject, down to following generations.
[/qb][/quote]
what if we were almost born with it?
Quote:
<strong>
The problem with a plurality of languages is not that they are languages but that there are more than one.</strong>
very true
ishalon is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 07:03 PM   #7
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: From:
Posts: 203
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Kachana:
[QB]'without legs, we wouldn't get very far, but with the ability to teleport vast distances we'd get much farther'QB]
hmm... good idea...

the point is that language is limiting us
ishalon is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 07:04 PM   #8
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: From:
Posts: 203
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by owleye:
<strong>ishalon....

It seems to me that language has two major functions: (1) to communicate thoughts with others; and (2) to express our thoughts. What gives you reason to believe this is not the case?

owleye</strong>
i didn't say i believed it wasnt
ishalon is offline  
Old 06-19-2002, 07:06 PM   #9
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: From:
Posts: 203
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Philosoft:
<strong>Hmm. Transferring thoughts. Why didn't I think of that?</strong>
because it is my own original idea thought of by myself. you are awed by my intellect and originality and have never seen anything remotely connected to telepathy
ishalon is offline  
Old 06-20-2002, 12:24 AM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Indus
Posts: 1,038
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ishalon:
<strong>Language is not an advantage of humans. It slows down learning, complicates facts, arguments and communication. Creation/Evolution debates would be long over if people had a method of transferring thoughts instead of misunderstanding misquoting misreading and misrepresenting each other.

If you could absorb thoughts instead of complicating them with language, you could learn much closer to your intellectual capacity than with language.

</strong>
Now could you suggest any "medium" which could replace language as a tool for communication and sharing? In any communication, there is a sender and reciever, how do you intend both of them to share a common framework (other than language or a common code) so that the transfer of thoughts takes place seamlessly without any transmission loss or loss due to individual perception? Are you suggesting the whole human race become one homogeneous mass ?
phaedrus is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:00 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.