Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:59 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:54 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:52 am
...if everything that you want to say can be expressed - none of these ideas are yours.
How does any of this support the above claim?
Well. I am trying to establish your criteria for what is and is not "expression".

I have expressed the word "grobmunf". Nobody understands it - but I have expressed it.

So far by your criteria. It is language. It is meaningful. And I have expressed it.

The fact that I am the only one who can understand the meaning/expression doesn't seem to bother you at all? It's a very solopsistic world-view...
Don't jump the gun...

Go back and read what I wrote. All language is meaningful. Language requires shared meaning. Thought does not. Rather, it requires meaning.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:03 am

creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:59 am
Go back and read what I wrote.
That is precisely what I am doing.
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:59 am
All language is meaningful. Language requires shared meaning. Thought does not. Rather, it requires meaning.
OK, so if you agree and all language is meaningful, then what is the meaning of "grobmunf" ?
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:49 am
I have no idea. That does not mean that it is not meaningful.
So you and I have no shared meaning for 'grobmunf'. Is it language or not?
Last edited by TimeSeeker on Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:04 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:58 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:56 am
What makes "X" meaningful. What makes "X" language? Let X be "grobmunf".

That's two questions, each with a different answer. The criterion for being meaningful is different than the criterion for being language.

What's your point here?
My point is that where you have drawn impermeable lines between the criteria for meaning and language I have not.

It needs to satisfy ALL those criteria! It needs to be communicable for it to be meaningful, for it to be language for it to be expression...
Are you saying that there is no difference between what meaning takes and what language takes?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am

creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:04 am
TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:58 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:56 am
What makes "X" meaningful. What makes "X" language? Let X be "grobmunf".

That's two questions, each with a different answer. The criterion for being meaningful is different than the criterion for being language.

What's your point here?
My point is that where you have drawn impermeable lines between the criteria for meaning and language I have not.

It needs to satisfy ALL those criteria! It needs to be communicable for it to be meaningful, for it to be language for it to be expression...
Are you saying that there is no difference between what meaning takes and what language takes?
I am saying that language (words) are meaningles in a vacuum. Words on paper contain no meaning!

Words can have intended meaning (from perspective of the person uttering them).
Words can have interpreted meaning (from the perspective of the person interpreting them).

Meaning is not IN the word.
Last edited by TimeSeeker on Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:03 am

So you and I have no shared meaning for 'grobmunf'. Is it language or not?
It is language if more than just you knows what it means.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:07 am

creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am
TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:03 am

So you and I have no shared meaning for 'grobmunf'. Is it language or not?
It is language if more than just you knows what it means.
So you can't determine if it is language or not at present? Therefore you can't determine if it's meaningful?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:11 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:07 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am
TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:03 am

So you and I have no shared meaning for 'grobmunf'. Is it language or not?
It is language if more than just you knows what it means.
So you can't determine if it is language or not at present? Therefore you can't determine if it's meaningful?
The point I am making is that if I am the one who invented the MEANING of the word 'grobmunf' (and I did!) then I am the only one who understands that meaning. Therefore it's not (yet) language. In order to make it language (by your own criteria) I have to TEACH at least one other person the MEANING of 'grobmunf'.

How?

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:16 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:06 am

I am saying that language (words) are meaningles in a vacuum. Words on paper contain no meaning!

Words can have intended meaning (from perspective of the person uttering them).
Words can have interpreted meaning (from the perspective of the person interpreting them).

Meaning is not IN the word.
Again... ok. So what?

Do you know what the difference is precisely between intended meaning and interpreted meaning? Do you know what all meaning consists in/of?

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:07 am
So you can't determine if it is language or not at present? Therefore you can't determine if it's meaningful?
No.

As I just said, I do not know what it means. I do not know if anyone other than you knows what it means. I do know that if someone else does, then it is language.

It is meaningful if you have drawn a correlation between 'grobmunf' and something else.

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:18 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:11 am

The point I am making is that if I am the one who invented the MEANING of the word 'grobmunf' (and I did!) then I am the only one who understands that meaning. Therefore it's not (yet) language. In order to make it language (by your own criteria) I have to TEACH at least one other person the MEANING of 'grobmunf'.

How?
There are multiple ways to teach someone the meaning of a word. All of them involve correlations between the word and something else.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:21 am

creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:16 am
As I just said, I do not know what it means. I do not know if anyone other than you knows what it means. I do know that if someone else does, then it is language.

It is meaningful if you have drawn a correlation between 'grobmunf' and something else.
So by the criterion of correlation what do you correlate the meaning of the word 'language' with?
What do you correlate the meaning of the word 'meaning' with?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:28 am

You said: Inventing language allows expression.
You also said: Language requires shared meaning.
You also said: All language is meaningful.

I invented "grobmunf".

You admitted that you can't determine if it's language or not.

So - did I invent language or not? If 'grobmunf' is not language then what is it?
If 'grobmunf' is not language then am I expressing myself?

Walker
Posts: 6836
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by Walker » Fri Nov 02, 2018 12:45 pm

Here’s a good example of knowing without language.

First the knowing which doesn't require language.
Then, the thinking about the knowing, which does require language.

You just know that something here is fishy.
Body language, the eyes, the chutzpah, the intellectual vacuity …

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1HdDywCi6k

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:35 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:28 am
You said: Inventing language allows expression.
You also said: Language requires shared meaning.
You also said: All language is meaningful.

I invented "grobmunf".

You admitted that you can't determine if it's language or not.

So - did I invent language or not? If 'grobmunf' is not language then what is it?
If 'grobmunf' is not language then am I expressing myself?
When I wrote "inventing language allows expression" I was following your lead. That's the first step in considering another's position. I was merely using what you had already invoked... the notion of inventing language. That said...

If "grobmunf" is a part of a correlation you've drawn between it and something else, then it is meaningful. I've said this already. If another person shares that meaning, then it is also the case that that person has drawn the same or a similar enough correlation between "grobmunf" and whatever else your correlation consists of.

If "grobmunf" is not part of a plurality of thinking/believing creatures' correlation(s), then it is not language. It can still be an elemental constituent of one's thought/belief. It can still be meaningful. If "grobmunf" is not language, then if you use it in a normal manner, you're still expressing your own thought/belief, for "grobmunf" is a part of that.

Here's the curious thing by my lights...

We are - here and now - involved in a metacognitive endeavor. There are some thought, some belief, some meaning. and some presupposition of correspondence that is prior to language, and thus cannot be existentially dependent upon neither language nor our account here.

What exactly is the difference between what you say meaning is, and how you say it works and your account thereof?

:mrgreen:

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:40 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:21 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:16 am
As I just said, I do not know what it means. I do not know if anyone other than you knows what it means. I do know that if someone else does, then it is language.

It is meaningful if you have drawn a correlation between 'grobmunf' and something else.
So by the criterion of correlation what do you correlate the meaning of the word 'language' with?
What do you correlate the meaning of the word 'meaning' with?
The question is ill-formed. On my view, one does not correlate meaning. Meaningful thought/belief is the product of drawing correlation(s) between different things.

creativesoul
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Is It Possible To Think Without Language?

Post by creativesoul » Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:55 am

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:58 am
creativesoul wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:56 am
What makes "X" meaningful. What makes "X" language? Let X be "grobmunf".

That's two questions, each with a different answer. The criterion for being meaningful is different than the criterion for being language.

What's your point here?
My point is that where you have drawn impermeable lines between the criteria for meaning and language I have not.
That's not true. I've drawn no such lines. There is a distinction to be drawn and maintained between meaning and language. The latter is always existentially dependent upon the former, but not the other way around. I've already been clearly arguing for exactly how that's the case.

TimeSeeker wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:58 am
It needs to satisfy ALL those criteria! It needs to be communicable for it to be meaningful, for it to be language for it to be expression.
I reject this. In fact, you yourself have said that you've expressed "grobmunf" despite the fact that only you know what it means. So... you've reached incoherency. How do you reconcile this apparent self-contradiction?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest