Thinking & Language

[pipokun]

Does eidos exist in thought? I doubt it.
Banzai for all dummies incl. me!

 

[Sensuikan San]

the same as Lina's in that any thinking beyond very rudimentary ideas requires language. I personally know that when I am mulling over any perplexing issue in my head those thoughts always take the form of words. Even simple things like opening up the refridgerator and trying to decide to have pepsi or orange juice, I find myself having a conversation in my head... "the orange juice would be better for you.... I sure could use some caffeine though... hey this paunch isn't going to disappear with either one maybe it should be water.." etc.

This is weird !

Personally - if I stand at the 'fridge door in the same predicament - I mentally see a movie of myself choosing the Pepsi or the juice .... ! Language doesn't even come into it !

Sounds a little silly - but obviously, many of us actually 'look' at the world in a totally different way !

Is this what determines wether or not we become architects, or engineers, or accountants or writers or ..... ? (I'm not even going to bring in ... musicians ...!)

Regards,

?W????

 

[edao]

I would imagine thought possible without language.

One example would be a baby that is only a few months old, while the child has no real language ability to form a formal thought in their mind they will still cry:too_sad: when their mother lays them down. They are displaying the ability to recognise that their mother is about to leave them and are capable of expressing their discomfort in her actions.

 

[Niroa]

Well, I think thinking is definitively possible withouth a language - but I guess it'll find its bounds when you want to "visualize" a conversation, for myself it always helps to "visualize" what I would like to say, before I "say" it.

 

[Gwyllgi]

I find I have a nasty habit of using language without thinking.

However I take solace in the knowledge that I'm far from alone in this.

To be serious, it’s surprising how many people go through life so often using mostly what have become clichés rather than original thought.

“I never have and I never will” for example when faced with a question that requires effort to formulate a reply, or a question the answer to which would mean abandonment of some bit of bigotry or prejudice.

“Yes, make it a pint” when asked if you want another drink. At least that’s what seems to be the case with most of my friends and acquaintances.

Come to think of it that probably says more about me and the people I mix with than anything else I suppose!

 

[Porphyrogenita]

Of course

Really interesting topic. I've had arguments about this in grad school. Of course thinking is possible without language, however we define language. How can we explore language acquisition in babies or glottogony or the behavior of other great apes if we don't accept that thinking is possible without/before language? Chimps and bonobos have been known to use tools and "language" (not to mention the host of other fascinating and complex behavior we can go into) (Refer to "Inside the Minds of Animals" in a recent issue of Time Magazine for bonobos and language use)

And what about a person who is born blind and deaf, like Helen Keller? Could we then argue that such a person doesn't think? Helen Keller actually earned a BA. It seems highly unlikely that she was incapable of complex thought. Yes, one could argue that she could use Braille and such, but even learning Braille would suggest thought, wouldn't it?

I voted "yes and no," because we do sometimes think in words - as some have pointed out above - so those particular thoughts wouldn't happen without language.

I'm sure I'm going to think about this thread the next time I open my refrigerator.

 

[LeBrok]

Are you afraid a refrigerator might have a conscious, or think something bad about you and your diet? :grin:

 

[Porphyrogenita]

lol no, but maybe now... I just meant because people were using the choosing food from their refrigerator example

 

[LeBrok]

Also interesting questions are:

Have humans invented language to express our advanced logic, and abstract thinking? Maybe it was just an accidental byproduct of these processes, but became very useful.

Or maybe the language was first and was essential in developing an abstract thought, organize societies, understand the world around and laws of physics?

I was watching recently a very interesting program, in which experts were proving that written words and alphabet was an invention from necessity, and not an eureka moment.
People could draw on wall, sand, wood and use symbols for thousands of years but the writing, as we know it, was invented for not much more than the record keeping. At one moment in agricultural societies people were so numerous that they had to start writing who paid taxes who didn't, how much gold and goods were in treasury, then later it snow balled into law and religion.
Most beneficiary of writing is communications and story telling these days, but they were not the source of invention.

So who knows there might be some parallel to invention of spoken language.

By the way, welcome to Eupedia Porphyrogenita.

 

[Segia]

Experiments with chimps showed that the "grammatical categories" that better used were imperative and vocative-nomative and were capable of memorizing more than 100 lexical units focussing on names and not on verbs and adjectives. Let's say they felt more comfortable with semantic issues than with abstract and morphologic ones.

Some authors think that children use the same logic in the early stages of language; the meaning (semantic) rules over sintaxis.

Next stage on language complexity would be related to the concepts of "space" and "time". We are eyesight mammals and it's pretty evident in our current languages.

Neurophysiologists have conclude that brain aereas used to speak and make tools are close related, then there could be the origin of a certain "abstract thinking". In other words, language could precede abstract thinking but the latter should precede grammatical language.

 

[LeBrok]

Neurophysiologists have conclude that brain aereas used to speak and make tools are close related, then there could be the origin of a certain "abstract thinking". In other words, language could precede abstract thinking but the latter should precede grammatical language.

It makes a lot of sense.
Other thing is that our memory is so superior compared to other mammals or even our closest ape cousins. We can memorize easily 10 000 words, but chimps only a 100. Looks like our good memory was essential to develop a language.

 

[iapetoc]

Well I believe that language is Busting thinking,
for example maths, with the symbols and the shapes we boost thinking on maths, while with out it is harder,

I believe smart do not need the language until a limit,
above that limit is the language that boosts and also share language to new generations,
that is why people boost literature, mathematic symbols etc,
language is a way to express not the only one, but also is a way to think fast, and share that thought,

in fact test a mathematic one, he maybe can expressed him shelf in literature well, but when comes to numbers and symbols he is free and fast expressed,
Language is the above of the monkey step.

Ancient Greeks unite language with words,
γλωσσα (tongue) and Λογος (logic, clear think, correct think)
the first is to communicate, the second is to think and find the truth, the act and react etc

for example tongue is hi hello, open the window, I am hungry
Logos is 1+1=2, drink water = good drink poison = bad
both are cnneced with the language we use or realize.