Thinking without words

[mnbvcxz87]

If you were to imagine humans pre word communication. How would you then define the universe and everything in it, and thoughts about these things, without words?

This is an incredible philosophical question and hard to imagine for us as we have always thought in language and words are accepted as fact in their definitions of things and concepts, but the truth is that none of our words or concepts have any lasting meaning. They are useful now, for us, but that is it.

 

[phsyxx]

Get the feeling this was inspired by some one else's thread.....

This is an incredible philosophical question and hard to imagine for us as we have always thought in language and words are accepted as fact in their definitions of things and concepts, but the truth is that none of our words or concepts have any lasting meaning. .

"an incredible philosophical question"?

Crikey!
Quite frankly, no it's not.
I can, without being too brash, answer your question with the words:
paralinguistics, gestures, physical actions, grunts, and imitations (e.g miming)

 

[mnbvcxz87]

ph you've missed the point.

 

[phsyxx]

ph you've missed the point.

What's the point then?
To answer the question of
"how did the ancient ancestors of modern man communicate?"

Answer: using a series of gestures, grunts, hand and eye-signals, paralinguistics, and imitation of events.

Have I missed the point?

 

[mnbvcxz87]

That isn't the question or the point.

The point is this. Our species has defined through language, every concept and thing we are aware of.

My point is that, from a philosophical point of view, how would you ascribe description or definition to any concept or thing that exists in this universe, without our words.

It's an amazing thing to imagine.

That the universe simply IS, and it is not how we would define it. Everything is one.

 

[phsyxx]

That isn't the question or the point.

The point is this. Our species has defined through language, every concept and thing we are aware of.

My point is that, from a philosophical point of view, how would you ascribe description or definition to any concept or thing that exists in this universe, without our words.

It's an amazing thing to imagine.

That the universe simply IS, and it is not how we would define it. Everything is one.

Do drawings count as description?
I mean, they're not words or verbal communication of sorts....
so, these ancestors would draw and paint to show their experiences.

If you're thinking of how things would be described without words...try looking at a Chimpanzee.

And also, please tell me if the post "paradoxical statements show that language is meaningless", inspired you to make this thread.

 

[elman]

That isn't the question or the point.

The point is this. Our species has defined through language, every concept and thing we are aware of.

My point is that, from a philosophical point of view, how would you ascribe description or definition to any concept or thing that exists in this universe, without our words.

It's an amazing thing to imagine.

That the universe simply IS, and it is not how we would define it. Everything is one.

How do you leap from the need for language to communicate to everything is one?

 

[phsyxx]

How do you leap from the need for language to communicate to everything is one?

For me there is no real philosophical area to explore here.

 

[elman]

For me there is no real philosophical area to explore here.

I simply am unable to see any connection between the need for language to communicate and the world view that everything is one thing and therefore God is nothing and not separated from the rest of the universe, but is defined as all existence.

 

[Mumbles]

If you were to imagine humans pre word communication. How would you then define the universe and everything in it, and thoughts about these things, without words?

This is an incredible philosophical question and hard to imagine for us as we have always thought in language and words are accepted as fact in their definitions of things and concepts, but the truth is that none of our words or concepts have any lasting meaning. They are useful now, for us, but that is it.

This might be an aside, but it seems to answer the question...people think in language? Do you mean they see/hear the words mentally when they think, instead of, say, the objects they're thinking about? That seems like it would be slow and confusing most of the time - when I think see/hear the word "chair" I think of an actual chair - the way it looks, feels, and sounds if it's old. How could anyone possibly know what the word "chair" means without doing that?

 

[MoonlessNight]

My point is that, from a philosophical point of view, how would you ascribe description or definition to any concept or thing that exists in this universe, without our words.

It's an amazing thing to imagine.

No it isn't. I do it all the time and I imagine most people do. I find all the time that I'll be able to understand something yet won't be able to put it in words, but I haven't really ever experienced the converse.

It kind of makes me wish that I had that Zhuangzi quote in my signature still. Suffice to say, words are only a matter of convenience. Bad things come of using them as anything more than that. But I don't think that most people have that problem when left to their own devices.

That the universe simply IS, and it is not how we would define it. Everything is one.

This is one of the "bad things" I referred to. It's perfectly possible to understand something without words. The universe could care less what labels we ascribe to it, whether or not we define things things still are.

The irony is that you have been blinded by words. You think that your statements free you, but in reality all that you have done is defined universe as "everything" and stopped thinking about it.

Incidentally, this is why I think that Abstract Algebra or at least some form of Group Theory should be required at the college level.

 

[mnbvcxz87]

So far no one has understood my point.

 

[Sojourner<><]

So far no one has understood my point.

I see language as the building blocks of understanding- the socially shared pool of common ideas and concepts. Sure it's fallible but it opens the bottleneck to more advanced understanding. So in a sense we are made more free by language and yet thought may still be limited by it in some sense if one were to become language-dependant in his or her thinking. Also, with an imperfect language system may come many misconceptions that make it more difficult to see what truly is. Just my two cents...

 

[quatona]

I often find myself thinking non-verbally and having problems to translate my thoughts into language.

 

[mnbvcxz87]

Discard all definitions and concepts and names of things, everything that IS, is what exists and it is one.

Thinking without words is actually a side issue but an interesting one.

 

[quatona]

Discard all definitions and concepts and names of things, everything that IS, is what exists and it is one.

Yes, sure.

Thinking without words is actually a side issue but an interesting one.

Well, according to your thread title it´s the very topic.

 

[mnbvcxz87]

Hah, I go off on tangents alot. It's a mind freeing experience to look at the world and space, and just ponder it without any of our words running through the thought, to just accept everything that is as existence, as one.

 

[fuzzyh]

Personally, I don't think that humans ever were without words. I do come from a theistic background. However, some scientific studies have demonstrated that babies are basically hardwired to communicate. That would also explain why young children learn languages very quickly.

Without using words or some identification, you end without any distinctions. To think about that, means that inherently there is no difference between you and the tiger that is going to kill you. Thus, all truly is one.

That said, our minds inherently make distinctions and those distinctions bring out words. We may not always have a word for every experience, but we can describe certain experiences. Those experiences we cannot describe, perhaps need new words to describe them. I'm sure a good wordsmith would be helpful to have around during those times.

As American's we are intellectually lazy. There are plenty of words to describe many of our experiences, but we simply do not care to know them.

In conclusion, I don't think we can think without words, because words are only place holders to make distinctions and we by nature make distinctions.

I hope this is clear. This might be a good starting place to write my Master's Thesis.

 

[mnbvcxz87]

Interesting thoughts. There definitely are distinctions between things, I'm not saying a tree is the same as a waterfall, rather the idea that everything which exists is part of the singular essense of existence.

The way words and concepts are used to define and explain existence in millions of small parts eg names, concepts, science, theology, space and so much more removes the idea of everything being one.

It's a bit like calling a bowl of soup a bowl of soup, not water,tomatos,herbs,pepper,salt etc.

Everything that we have defined does make up the universe, but the universe is one.

 

[quatona]

Interesting thoughts. There definitely are distinctions between things, I'm not saying a tree is the same as a waterfall, rather the idea that everything which exists is part of the singular essense of existence.

The way words and concepts are used to define and explain existence in millions of small parts eg names, concepts, science, theology, space and so much more removes the idea of everything being one.

It's a bit like calling a bowl of soup a bowl of soup, not water,tomatos,herbs,pepper,salt etc.

I´d agree, except that language is not the issue. The issue are our concepts, our distinctions - whether we have words for them or not. We perceive things as separated, and conceptualization is in its essence a matter of separating, distinguishing things.
Words just express that which we perceive.