*Words as Gods; Creationism; Language and its Matrix*

Page 3 of 3 [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

ouinon
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

14 Jun 2009, 1:33 am

Postperson wrote:
NTs treat words like god, don't they, they elevate them above all things - they define the universe for them? bow down and worship before the word. words are a toy to me, i find it hard to take them seriously.

I ran a thread in General Discussion a couple of months ago with a poll asking if people were addicted to language. The overwhelming majority voted to say that they were, ( either that it was "their life", or that they were "heavy users" ).

I think language addiction is an Aspie thing. It might not be an Autistic thing though; the DSM does suggest that there is a difference between the two groups based on language use.

My impression is that although many/most NT's mindlessly/unthinkingly "obey" the general gist of language they are not as deeply constructed/influenced by it, not as vulnerable/sensitive to it, as people on the Aspergers part of the spectrum are, ( which would not be surprising if, as they say, 75%, or more, of human communication is body language ).

Most NT's don't seem to take ( verbal ) language all that seriously, nor do they think about it very much, and, in stark contrast with AS, they apparently don't mind spending hours exchanging empty, almost meaningless, ( contradictory, etc ), remarks in order to establish/maintain social bonds and pecking orders. Language doesn't seem to "touch" them to the same degree as it does many AS.
.



Last edited by ouinon on 14 Jun 2009, 4:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,576
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

14 Jun 2009, 2:24 am

ouinon wrote:
Recent theory suggests that language exists almost like an organism, living in symbiotic relationship with our brains. Those forms of language which the majority of brains could handle survived, and flourished.


Very interesting choice of words, almost as if its another organism separate from us - like the large amounts of bacteria, fungus, etc. that dominate the amount of human DNA that's in us? Intuitively its hard to grasp because, you would think that our minds through evolution had innate capabilities that hadn't found a use, abilities that may have arisen as side effects of other needs, and it took the agricultural revolution for people to have enough of the right kinds of contact for it to flourish.

Have you ever heard the Neandrethal/Cromagnon interbreeding theory? The idea presented with that one is that we largely assimilated the Neandrethals and that their DNA became the catalyst in spurring our own into rapid changes which brought on more in the way of abstract thought and the like.



Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

14 Jun 2009, 2:44 am

Neanderthal/Cromagnon theories are always interesting. We do have bigger foreheads than NT's. That is just one physical observation. I just read yesterday that Hitler (sorry to bring the nazis up) and the nazi doctors thought the high forehead/big head was a desirable trait. Supposedly those people carried more logical minded genes of some sort. I don't see why they sought out blue eyes and blonde hair tho...anyways...

I have always held a fascination for language as ounion described.


_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras


Postperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2004
Age: 68
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,023
Location: Uz

14 Jun 2009, 3:56 am

oh i'm fascinated by it (language), but that's because i know i'm outside of it and can see how crucial it is to have good skills with it in NT world. it's foreign.



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

14 Jun 2009, 6:53 pm

ouinon wrote:
The earliest known writing which involved linguistic content as opposed to numbers and symbols for objects is Sumerian from 2600BC onwards.

Quote:
All writing including that which you are reading now entails symbols standing in for objects. Indeed all language does this.

Ouinon, this trait of using language for thinking and knowing it is yourself is pervasive to human groups including those genetically isolated from other human groups since well before the time frame you are positing. It’s implausible that this trait did not develop at all until 4000 or so years ago then suddenly spread throughout all human gene pools, including genetically isolated ones.



claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

14 Jun 2009, 7:00 pm

Postperson wrote:
oh i'm fascinated by it (language), but that's because i know i'm outside of it...
I think this is the only thing in this thread I have been able to relate to, much less really understand. I have trouble seeing language the way ouinon does. It gets twisted up in my head. Funny though, I do not seem to have as much trouble with written language as verbal, although written can cause problems too.



Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,745
Location: Middle East

29 Jul 2009, 8:39 am

Postperson wrote:
One of our member's special interest is visiting holy sites in jerusalem, but she lives there. not sure if i should advise her of this alleged syndrome or not.


You might also figure yourself that, living here, we know all about "Jerusalem Syndrome".

And by the way, it happens to Christians only, of course. How do you think a Jew could suddenly feel they're Jesus or Napoleon from having visited the Christianholy places.

:roll:


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.