How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

commonsense
Posts: 2151
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by commonsense » Sat Oct 12, 2019 5:02 pm

bahman wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:54 pm
We are able to do so because the langauge is based on, words and sentences, which each points toward an abstract or real object.
We do so by means of feedback, circular imprecise feedback. We say something. Someone else says something that reveals that their understanding of what was intended is incorrect. We say something to clarify what was intended. Feedback continues until there is a workable level of understanding.

Me: “A”
You: “~~A” you understand approximately

Me: “A+“ I add clarifying information
You: “~A” you are closer to understanding

Me: “A++” more detail
You: “A” understanding via feedback

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3117
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by bahman » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:40 am

Walker wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:06 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:29 pm
Impenitent wrote:
Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:08 pm


oing

-Imp
I googled oing but I couldn't get what do you mean. Could you please elaborate?
"oing" makes sense because of the thread title. What makes sense, communicates.

"oing" is missing a letter, which makes it incomplete, referencing the thread title of incomplete language.

The missing letter is most likely g. It may also be b or p to make slang, or h to make more slang.

A d would make sense in relation to the question.

L has an outside chance.

Conclusion: The answer to the thread title question is, imprecisely.

oing, oing, one.
Ok, thanks.

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3117
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by bahman » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:41 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:39 pm
bahman wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:54 pm
We are able to do so because the langauge is based on, words and sentences, which each points toward an abstract or real object.
Circularity.

All words are circular in nature.

In progressing to further words these new words cycle back to the original.

Each word as applied by the subject to an object is a cycle, as this definition of the object becomes a loop within the observer's perception. This loop is the repetition of the word and image of the object (with this image/word being a cycle). Memory is the repition of events as a loop.

The loop between the word and object, through the subject, is repeated to further subjects as a loop thus the word becomes objective (ie given form, with this form occurring through a looping movement.).


Keep in mind the word "point" you use. It is not only necessitating a form of direction but a dynamic change that under lies language. When you "point" you are directing your assumptive capacity to something and are being imprinted (changing) through it.

The object as "the point" becomes that which you assume reality through without thought. So I may point to a bike on the road, assume it, and observe all bikes through the pattern of that bike. I may also observer further phenomenon, such as a cloud or wheel, through the pattern of that bike.

Thus each phenomenon we assume, acts as a pattern for assuming further phenomenon as well.

We assume through instrincially empty looping patterns and we are assumed by this. "Pointing" is the inversion of one pattern of assumptions to another, thus necessitates consciousness as grounded in isomorphism and as such is formless. This formless nature of consciousness is the unconscious, that which is passive and is imprinted by reality.

The repition of this inversion, or the projection of formless, is consciousness itself.
If the real meaning of any word was only circular then a word is pointing to itself.

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3117
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by bahman » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:44 am

commonsense wrote:
Sat Oct 12, 2019 5:02 pm
bahman wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:54 pm
We are able to do so because the langauge is based on, words and sentences, which each points toward an abstract or real object.
We do so by means of feedback, circular imprecise feedback. We say something. Someone else says something that reveals that their understanding of what was intended is incorrect. We say something to clarify what was intended. Feedback continues until there is a workable level of understanding.

Me: “A”
You: “~~A” you understand approximately

Me: “A+“ I add clarifying information
You: “~A” you are closer to understanding

Me: “A++” more detail
You: “A” understanding via feedback
Well, A++ is the abstract object which I have in my mind.

commonsense
Posts: 2151
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by commonsense » Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:23 pm

bahman wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:44 am
commonsense wrote:
Sat Oct 12, 2019 5:02 pm
bahman wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:54 pm
We are able to do so because the langauge is based on, words and sentences, which each points toward an abstract or real object.
We do so by means of feedback, circular imprecise feedback. We say something. Someone else says something that reveals that their understanding of what was intended is incorrect. We say something to clarify what was intended. Feedback continues until there is a workable level of understanding.

Me: “A”
You: “~~A” you understand approximately

Me: “A+“ I add clarifying information
You: “~A” you are closer to understanding

Me: “A++” more detail
You: “A” understanding via feedback
Well, A++ is the abstract object which I have in my mind.
Exactly!

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6057
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:54 pm

bahman wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:41 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:39 pm
bahman wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:54 pm
We are able to do so because the langauge is based on, words and sentences, which each points toward an abstract or real object.
Circularity.

All words are circular in nature.

In progressing to further words these new words cycle back to the original.

Each word as applied by the subject to an object is a cycle, as this definition of the object becomes a loop within the observer's perception. This loop is the repetition of the word and image of the object (with this image/word being a cycle). Memory is the repition of events as a loop.

The loop between the word and object, through the subject, is repeated to further subjects as a loop thus the word becomes objective (ie given form, with this form occurring through a looping movement.).


Keep in mind the word "point" you use. It is not only necessitating a form of direction but a dynamic change that under lies language. When you "point" you are directing your assumptive capacity to something and are being imprinted (changing) through it.

The object as "the point" becomes that which you assume reality through without thought. So I may point to a bike on the road, assume it, and observe all bikes through the pattern of that bike. I may also observer further phenomenon, such as a cloud or wheel, through the pattern of that bike.

Thus each phenomenon we assume, acts as a pattern for assuming further phenomenon as well.

We assume through instrincially empty looping patterns and we are assumed by this. "Pointing" is the inversion of one pattern of assumptions to another, thus necessitates consciousness as grounded in isomorphism and as such is formless. This formless nature of consciousness is the unconscious, that which is passive and is imprinted by reality.

The repition of this inversion, or the projection of formless, is consciousness itself.
If the real meaning of any word was only circular then a word is pointing to itself.
It does, we see this in the most basic principle of identity: P=P as ((P-->P)<-->(P<--P))

We assume forms and the most basic form is the circle. We assume definition primarily because of it...we just accept it as is.

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3117
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by bahman » Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:54 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:41 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:39 pm


Circularity.

All words are circular in nature.

In progressing to further words these new words cycle back to the original.

Each word as applied by the subject to an object is a cycle, as this definition of the object becomes a loop within the observer's perception. This loop is the repetition of the word and image of the object (with this image/word being a cycle). Memory is the repition of events as a loop.

The loop between the word and object, through the subject, is repeated to further subjects as a loop thus the word becomes objective (ie given form, with this form occurring through a looping movement.).


Keep in mind the word "point" you use. It is not only necessitating a form of direction but a dynamic change that under lies language. When you "point" you are directing your assumptive capacity to something and are being imprinted (changing) through it.

The object as "the point" becomes that which you assume reality through without thought. So I may point to a bike on the road, assume it, and observe all bikes through the pattern of that bike. I may also observer further phenomenon, such as a cloud or wheel, through the pattern of that bike.

Thus each phenomenon we assume, acts as a pattern for assuming further phenomenon as well.

We assume through instrincially empty looping patterns and we are assumed by this. "Pointing" is the inversion of one pattern of assumptions to another, thus necessitates consciousness as grounded in isomorphism and as such is formless. This formless nature of consciousness is the unconscious, that which is passive and is imprinted by reality.

The repition of this inversion, or the projection of formless, is consciousness itself.
If the real meaning of any word was only circular then a word is pointing to itself.
It does, we see this in the most basic principle of identity: P=P as ((P-->P)<-->(P<--P))

We assume forms and the most basic form is the circle. We assume definition primarily because of it...we just accept it as is.
You cannot have a meaningful definition if any word points to itself.

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6057
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: How are we able to communicate ideas through incomplete langauge?

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:16 pm

bahman wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:54 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:41 am

If the real meaning of any word was only circular then a word is pointing to itself.
It does, we see this in the most basic principle of identity: P=P as ((P-->P)<-->(P<--P))

We assume forms and the most basic form is the circle. We assume definition primarily because of it...we just accept it as is.
You cannot have a meaningful definition if any word points to itself.
It means itself.

Second if x progresses to y and y progresses back to x while progressing to z, then x is pointing to itself under a different variation.

So if 1 progresses to 2 what we see is one referencing itself through 2 as two is composed of one.


All definitions are rings within rings, with ring being the constant.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests