The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

What did you say? And what did you mean by it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Seleucus
Posts: 667
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:53 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Seleucus » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:20 pm
A quick summary of what you stating is: "You do not see the world as I, nor the group of people through which I interact see it, therefore you are wrong." Schizophrenia is marked generally by antisocial behavior and not accepting the world as it is. If this is the case "labeling" a person schizophrenic in a manner which equates them to a social outcast is in itself antisocial, and to argue that they are not "real" nor what they are experiencing is "real" is just a dual symmetrical behavior to what schizophrenia is.
So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6689
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:19 am

Seleucus wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:20 pm
A quick summary of what you stating is: "You do not see the world as I, nor the group of people through which I interact see it, therefore you are wrong." Schizophrenia is marked generally by antisocial behavior and not accepting the world as it is. If this is the case "labeling" a person schizophrenic in a manner which equates them to a social outcast is in itself antisocial, and to argue that they are not "real" nor what they are experiencing is "real" is just a dual symmetrical behavior to what schizophrenia is.
So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.
I'm sure you know a heck of a lot about schizophrenia. Would that be potato or turnip pie?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:33 pm

Seleucus wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:20 pm
A quick summary of what you stating is: "You do not see the world as I, nor the group of people through which I interact see it, therefore you are wrong." Schizophrenia is marked generally by antisocial behavior and not accepting the world as it is. If this is the case "labeling" a person schizophrenic in a manner which equates them to a social outcast is in itself antisocial, and to argue that they are not "real" nor what they are experiencing is "real" is just a dual symmetrical behavior to what schizophrenia is.
So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

I wish, but unfortunately not...I would be nice to be in a government sponsored fog/high all day, people like you would be more interesting. Diagnosed with an IQ of 161...maybe that is worse...I personally believe it is...but you can't trust authority figures these days especially those who like to put labels on everything.

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.

Actually you are taking the argument out of context, at least mine, as the root of the argument I have presented is founded under a universal triangulation found within the nature of language...to put it very briefly. In regards to the nature of Pi, the nature of a line between two points is a universal structure as it represents a duality in one respect (two points) and trinitarian in second (the two points and the line in turn form a third point as the circle).

In regards to the axe-axle "clang association" a lot of words have universal roots. Take for example the word "rationality". It is an approximate of the greek word "ratio" which loosely translates to "proportions". In many respect to be "reasonable" or "rational" is strictly to observe "proportions". It is within this nature of observing proportions where we are inevitably reduce to not only look at reality as spatial structure, but are reduced to look as language itself being composed of what reality is composed of "space". This brings me back to the point about the "axe/axel" observation. In understanding this nature of words as having roots in certain points we are not only able to better understand their origins and potential future but also gain a better understanding of ourselves for we view the world through language. Language, in many respects is its own perspective, it's own philosophy. Observing similiarities in "axe/axel" is as much about finding the root of the world but the root of how we and our ancestors understand the world. It is not much of a stretch at all to observe the "axe" as an "axel" of early civilization, for much like mathematical symbols words are "pack" with multiple reflective meanings.
The question I have for you, since you do not appear to have the ability for original thought and actually contribute to this discussion, is: Why are you obsessed with putting a diagnosis on people who think and view the world differently than you? You would understand, if you have done any research at all, the standards for psychiatric diagnosis vary not only per country (with American practioner's being more liberal in this regard, than their European counterparts) but that actual standards flux at a reasonable rate every 15-20 years approximately.

I'll respond for you so you can take a break and think about not only this, but the actual discussion itself (I do not want to veer to far off of it.).

You first response will most likely be to repeat "this sounds schizophrenic/drug induced". But after I say this you will step back and think for a moment, most probably with a little bit of anger, and possibly come up with some other "insult".

But considering I brought this up, your best bet would be to double down on the argument itself, in order to prove your superiority, however you have no other insight than the "clang association", which is not only ad-hominum and unoriginal, but is false on it's own merits in this respect.

Your next move might be to call us "crazy", so you can satisfy yourself with "the last word".

But considering I brought this up, you will think of not responding all together, except with maybe a "why did you waste your time with such a response?" And my answer will be simple, it was just a brief fleeting thought that took a minute or two to right.

This is all based on "probability" however, so I am not expecting to get it all right.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:39 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:19 am
Seleucus wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:20 pm
A quick summary of what you stating is: "You do not see the world as I, nor the group of people through which I interact see it, therefore you are wrong." Schizophrenia is marked generally by antisocial behavior and not accepting the world as it is. If this is the case "labeling" a person schizophrenic in a manner which equates them to a social outcast is in itself antisocial, and to argue that they are not "real" nor what they are experiencing is "real" is just a dual symmetrical behavior to what schizophrenia is.
So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.
I'm sure you know a heck of a lot about schizophrenia. Would that be potato or turnip pie?

Unfortunately I know alot about everything. Take for instance the reason why you are here. The most probable reason, is that you are not only looking for the "meaning" and "nature" of life and gain some form of companionship like everyone else, but it is primarily because you are sexually frustrated with your own life and are trying to "fill" the void else. And by sexual frustrate I do not mean a lack of sexual partner(s), but no kids specifically considering, and I am making a guess you are in your mid thirties?

This is all a guess, and I am probably wrong, but that is the vibe I get.

Now, if we are done with the ad-hominums, can we all get back to the actual argument/discourse itself? This is actually an interesting subject.

User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Vendetta » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:43 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:39 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:19 am
Seleucus wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am

So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.
I'm sure you know a heck of a lot about schizophrenia. Would that be potato or turnip pie?

Unfortunately I know alot about everything. Take for instance the reason why you are here. The most probable reason, is that you are not only looking for the "meaning" and "nature" of life and gain some form of companionship like everyone else, but it is primarily because you are sexually frustrated with your own life and are trying to "fill" the void else. And by sexual frustrate I do not mean a lack of sexual partner(s), but no kids specifically considering, and I am making a guess you are in your mid thirties?

This is all a guess, and I am probably wrong, but that is the vibe I get.

Now, if we are done with the ad-hominums, can we all get back to the actual argument/discourse itself? This is actually an interesting subject.
If you say you know a lot about everything, I'm surprised to see you later admit that you're probably wrong.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:58 pm

Vendetta wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:43 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:39 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:19 am


I'm sure you know a heck of a lot about schizophrenia. Would that be potato or turnip pie?

Unfortunately I know alot about everything. Take for instance the reason why you are here. The most probable reason, is that you are not only looking for the "meaning" and "nature" of life and gain some form of companionship like everyone else, but it is primarily because you are sexually frustrated with your own life and are trying to "fill" the void else. And by sexual frustrate I do not mean a lack of sexual partner(s), but no kids specifically considering, and I am making a guess you are in your mid thirties?

This is all a guess, and I am probably wrong, but that is the vibe I get.

Now, if we are done with the ad-hominums, can we all get back to the actual argument/discourse itself? This is actually an interesting subject.
If you say you know a lot about everything, I'm surprised to see you later admit that you're probably wrong.
I know I am guessing, and the nature of guess is rooted in probability and the observation of relations in patterns. In a separate respect, "a lot" and "everything" are two infinitely different things. With that being said, I will go down the ad-hominum route if people want to go there. I get that some people need to quench that appetite, however I would prefer to stay on this subject... it is actually interesting.

User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Vendetta » Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:03 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:58 pm
Vendetta wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:43 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:39 pm



Unfortunately I know alot about everything. Take for instance the reason why you are here. The most probable reason, is that you are not only looking for the "meaning" and "nature" of life and gain some form of companionship like everyone else, but it is primarily because you are sexually frustrated with your own life and are trying to "fill" the void else. And by sexual frustrate I do not mean a lack of sexual partner(s), but no kids specifically considering, and I am making a guess you are in your mid thirties?

This is all a guess, and I am probably wrong, but that is the vibe I get.

Now, if we are done with the ad-hominums, can we all get back to the actual argument/discourse itself? This is actually an interesting subject.
If you say you know a lot about everything, I'm surprised to see you later admit that you're probably wrong.
I know I am guessing, and the nature of guess is rooted in probability and the observation of relations in patterns. In a separate respect, "a lot" and "everything" are two infinitely different things. With that being said, I will go down the ad-hominum route if people want to go there. I get that some people need to quench that appetite, however I would prefer to stay on this subject... it is actually interesting.
If what you desire is to stay on the subject, why do you bother engaging with the ad-hominem people if you can see that the only way they feel they can prove their argument or make themselves feel big is to attack others?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:07 pm

Vendetta wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:03 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:58 pm
Vendetta wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:43 pm


If you say you know a lot about everything, I'm surprised to see you later admit that you're probably wrong.
I know I am guessing, and the nature of guess is rooted in probability and the observation of relations in patterns. In a separate respect, "a lot" and "everything" are two infinitely different things. With that being said, I will go down the ad-hominum route if people want to go there. I get that some people need to quench that appetite, however I would prefer to stay on this subject... it is actually interesting.
If what you desire is to stay on the subject, why do you bother engaging with the ad-hominem people if you can see that the only way they feel they can prove their argument or make themselves feel big is to attack others?
Because it is not all about me and what I want.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6689
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:49 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:39 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:19 am
Seleucus wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:19 am

So have you had a diagnosis on the schizoid spectrum? Or perhaps smoking drugs?

As I say, there are what I see as legitimate uses of phonological features. For instance we can say that Zeus, Jupiter, and Deus all have a common sound and also root and that the spread of monotheism into Europe was associated with an expansion of the sky god concept into top god. Etymology and history of religion and philosophy would all have some concurrence on that point. The axe-axle "clang association" however isn't etymological because the two words actually have different roots in PIE. It might inspire something in you, but for myself, it looks confused and brings to mind schizophrenic thinking or maybe cannabis induced psychosis.
I'm sure you know a heck of a lot about schizophrenia. Would that be potato or turnip pie?

Unfortunately I know alot about everything. Take for instance the reason why you are here. The most probable reason, is that you are not only looking for the "meaning" and "nature" of life and gain some form of companionship like everyone else, but it is primarily because you are sexually frustrated with your own life and are trying to "fill" the void else. And by sexual frustrate I do not mean a lack of sexual partner(s), but no kids specifically considering, and I am making a guess you are in your mid thirties?

This is all a guess, and I am probably wrong, but that is the vibe I get.

Now, if we are done with the ad-hominums, can we all get back to the actual argument/discourse itself? This is actually an interesting subject.
I thought that's what 'sexually frustrated' meant :? Btw. A 'sexually frustrated woman' is just a misogynistic male fantasy. Just saying. And no, no, no, no, and no....I think that's about right. And the 'meaning' of an individuals life is whatever they choose it to 'mean', because 'meaning' doesn't apply to 'life' anyway. You might as well say 'what is the 'meaning' of cats?
ps. And you don't know as much as you think you do. My comment wasn't even to you or about you.

User avatar
Seleucus
Posts: 667
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:53 am

Re: The First Words... The Origin of Human Language

Post by Seleucus » Tue Sep 26, 2017 3:23 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:33 pm
people like you
Projection/ad hom.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:universal triangulation
...
In regards to the nature of Pi,
...
a universal structure as it represents a duality in one respect (two points) and trinitarian in second
Speaking for myself personally, I see this sort of talk as some kind schizophrenic nonsense.
Observing similiarities in "axe/axel" is as much about finding the root of the world but the root of how we and our ancestors understand the world. It is not much of a stretch at all to observe the "axe" as an "axel" of early civilization, for much like mathematical symbols words are "pack" with multiple reflective meanings.
They are false cognates, there isn't actually a connection. Good for you though if you find some inspiration somehow in it.
since you do not appear to have the ability for original thought
Projection/ad hom
Why are you obsessed with putting a diagnosis on people who think and view the world differently than you?
Obsesed may be to strong a word. I've just seen this kind of thinking before and consider it schizo.

You would understand, if you have done any research at all, the standards for psychiatric diagnosis vary not only per country (with American practioner's being more liberal in this regard, than their European counterparts) but that actual standards flux at a reasonable rate every 15-20 years approximately.
Be that as it may, when I read something that sounds like Swedenborgism I think to myself, that's schizo style thinking.
You first response will most likely be to repeat "this sounds schizophrenic/drug induced".

True, I haven't changed my mind about that.
But after I say this you will step back and think for a moment, most probably with a little bit of anger, and possibly come up with some other "insult".
Nope. I am speaking for myself about my own thoughts and feelings only.
But considering I brought this up, your best bet would be to double down on the argument itself, in order to prove your superiority, however you have no other insight than the "clang association", which is not only ad-hominum and unoriginal, but is false on it's own merits in this respect.
I don't reckon it is ad hom or unoriginal. That's how I see it, it's air loom gang talk to my eyes.
Your next move might be to call us "crazy", so you can satisfy yourself with "the last word".
So? Clang association is crazy.
But considering I brought this up, you will think of not responding all together, except with maybe a "why did you waste your time with such a response?" And my answer will be simple, it was just a brief fleeting thought that took a minute or two to right.

This is all based on "probability" however, so I am not expecting to get it all right.
If you like your clang association approach to philosophy, go for it. If that brings you closer to the deep truth of the universe, super. But for me, it sounds like a crazy talk. It isn't the kind of approach to philosophy that I groove to. It's an open chat forum, so I told you I don't think axe-axle dualism and trinity triangulation makes sense to me as far as the origin of language the meaning of absence and pointing goes. Or maybe I feel for you? Maybe I used to go on with such mumbo jumbo and fear that you might be suffering and confused and hope you can get some peace and clarity.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests