Does Language Hinder Our Progress? (verse)

[texan1]

Interesting question mball. It reminds me of one of my favorite Shakespeare quotes from A Midsummer Night's Dream:

"And as imagination bodies forth, The forms of things unknown,
the poet's pen turns them into shapes, and gives to airy nothing a local habitation and a name"

Sort of a statement on how a poet uses language to put the indescribable into words...when the poet transposes his thoughts on paper, these thoughts have a tangible reality as words and letters and symbols, even if their content consists of unreality.

I read an article which talked about how Shakespeare felt the poet exists in reality but must transcend that reality to create his art, to view another world in which this art can develop free of constraint. He must inhibit the fantastical in order to create great works which go beyond ideas confined to every day reality.

Hopefully this is still on topic, but I would say that when I read Shakespeare I feel like he was able to manipulate language in such a way that helps people (or me at least) to understand some beautiful truths for which language usually falls short.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by mball1297

Does this mean that you see language as an imperfect way of communicating? Why do you see it that way, if that is true?

Because langauge itself is imperfect, and therefore is constantly being re-shaped to communicate more effectively.

[mball1297]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Because langauge itself is imperfect, and therefore is constantly being re-shaped to communicate more effectively.

But what is imperfect about it? What is the flaw that makes it not perfect?

[Random]

Language is useful in establishing the consensus aspect of our shared world/reality. It can hinder or enhance our ability to manipulate that world/reality, depending on the interface capacity of the user, and the breath and scope of conceptualization it allows for.

If tomorrow we unconsciously @ first (then consciously later) decided that chicken really tastes like fish, then if enough subconscious minds agreed chicken tasted like fish it would eventually taste like fish, and whenver one tasted chicken it would be called "fish", or more specifically "fishy" or something else indicating its fishiness. That's the power of language, it programs our sensory world.

Saying thus that signs are not the same as the things signified is no different than saying values assigned representatively change, and are never wholly contained in the indicative symbolic array by which the mind interacts with illusion, mistaken for "reality". This is an old idea, Maya, familiar to anyone interested in Buddhism or the Vedas.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Bishadi

Then the bible was a complete fib?

No, it's full of metaphors to help reveal the truth within.

[Seyorni]

That our perception of Reality and conceptual capabilities is structured in our language is a given.This is Anthropology/ Linguistics 101 (introductory level in the US system). The only question is the degree to which language is deterministic.

Language is a communication tool, but this not its major function.
Language is the operating system of our consciousness. It determines how we perceive reality, how we interpret reality; how we organize our lives and societies.
Language determines what we see and what is invisible to us. It determines how we organize our perceptions and thoughts, in fact, what we are capable of thinking.

In this thread Mball is questioning our ideas about the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, http://en.wikipedia.org.wiki/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis, but,I suspect, he didn't want to quash the discussion by sounding too technical.

[God this is frustrating. I type in a link address and it just doesn't work, even when it's the right address. What's the trick to this? If I type it into the Google space it works. How come some people can even link a word itself to a websight and I can't even link to a site with a correct address?]

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by mball1297

But what is imperfect about it? What is the flaw that makes it not perfect?

As we continue to have new experiences, langauge is continually proven inadequate, which is why we have to develop new words, idioms, and syntactical structure to express ourselves.

[Scarlett Wampus]

Originally Posted by Seyorni

In this thread Mball is questioning our ideas about the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, http://en.wikipedia.org.wiki/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis, but,I suspect, he didn't want to quash the discussion by sounding too technical.

[God this is frustrating. I type in a link address and it just doesn't work, even when it's the right address. What's the trick to this? If I type it into the Google space it works. How come some people can even link a word itself to a websight and I can't even link to a site with a correct address?]

You were one / short! Its Sapir–Whorf hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ( <- lol, it doesn't display right, but the link works). The trick is highlighting the address in the Internet browser address bar at the top, right clicking the highlighted text and selecting copy. After that all you need to do is right click in any text box and select paste.