No language, no thoughts? (interview, speech, claim, work)

[nebulous1]

If we didn't have language, would we be able to think? Or, would our thoughts be more like impressions, feelings, more like an animal?

Is language the very thing that limits animals from becoming like us?

With language, we think and have the thoughts, "I know I think this." or "I know that I came into the room."

But without language, would it just be perceived as an acknowlegement of what just happened?

[nebulous1]

Try to think without using language. Try to think about something without hearing the words in your head. Rather than saying in your mind, "I think I will respond to this post", try just thinking about that concept without words. I cannot do it. Can you?

[fracturedman]

Originally Posted by nebulous1

Try to think without using language. Try to think about something without hearing the words in your head. Rather than saying in your mind, "I think I will respond to this post", try just thinking about that concept without words. I cannot do it. Can you?

Doing so is like trying to imagine what nothing would be like...Imagine if nothing existed...what would it be like?

Darkness? no becasue that is something
Void? no because that is the absence of something
nothing? no because nothing it truly indescribable

So when someone says nothing is impossible...they are in fact correct...nothing is impossible for us to comprehend...

[Barbie2015]

Have you guys ever caught yourself on not thinking? This very moment of not thinking? Not to think happens to everyone sometimes (to some often but how many notices that? I've experienced that once and it was scary. And I can describe that as nothing, as there was no me for a split of second

[jtur88]

Language did not suddenly strike humans like a bolt of lightning. It gradually evolved as a way of communicating what you were thinking. So thinking must have preceded language, and language was a construct that made thinking communicable.

As a parallel, think of mathematics as a form of language. Early humans were capable of distinguishing a lot of berries from a few berries, and were capable of dividing a handful of berries into several equal parts. They were "thinking" mathematical constructs, and only later did they devise a formal arithmetic language.

[subsound]

Thinking and communication are different, but language allows you to categorize and conceptualize ideas easier and make your thoughts known. Without language the abstract and ethereal things would be hard to visualize, normal things you can see and touch would be unaffected. Without being able to communicate you also could not learn from thoughts and experiences of those before, limiting the growth of people.

[jtur88]

If you watch a great artist at work, it will be apparent to you that he is not "thinking" about what he is doing in any language that he could possibly verbalize.

I once saw (on TV) an idiot savant, barely capable of speech, take a lump of clay and in about two minutes, transform it into a perfect lhighly detailed replica of a horse. What words do you suppose he was saying to himself during that process?

In fact, here he is:

youtube.com/watch?v=lkDMaJ-wZmQ (Copy and paste this URL, and avoid the annoying full-screen still here)

One interesting point revealed in this video, is that possibly, people have exceptional talents that are inaccessible, because we clutter our thoughts with language which overrides other talents. It makes it impossible for us to do things that we cannot verbalize.

[ChrisC]

I'd go as far as to say that our thoughts are dominated/controlled by our language to a large extent. I have a feeling that the strengths and weaknesses of a given language can affect the strength and weaknesses of the speakers of that language as well (no proof... and too lazy to research the issue). If in a given language, there is an aspect that isn’t so efficient, that will manifest itself in a speaker not being able to express some intended thought because he/she ‘cant find the words’ or grammar to express it. That’s one reason that I’m such a bit advocate of ‘cleaning English up.’

On the other hand, I do believe a more fundamental mode of thinking is purely visual (within the mind). In the absence of language, this 'visual' thinking would be the only available mode. The level of sophistication of such thoughts is hard to imagine because, from infancy, we've developed our verbal/analytical mode of thinking and seldom use the visual side. (this is all just opinion/babble of course and better suited to psycholinguists)


Great topic by the way... Such a refreshing break from... well, you know.

[jtur88]

I recall an interview, when Paul Thereaux first met the great Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. They talked about writing devices, and Borges would exclaim "You can't do that in Spanish!". You can't coin a phrase or shoe a horse in Spanish, because using a noun as a verb is disallowed. So Borges writes in English. When I was studying Spanish, I tried writing poetry, and my instructor would just say "You can't do that".

Whenever I read an English translation of a book, this thought remains in the back of my mind, that the original could not have done certain things, even if the translator takes the license of doing so in English.

[nebulous1]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Language did not suddenly strike humans like a bolt of lightning. It gradually evolved as a way of communicating what you were thinking. So thinking must have preceded language, and language was a construct that made thinking communicable.

As a parallel, think of mathematics as a form of language. Early humans were capable of distinguishing a lot of berries from a few berries, and were capable of dividing a handful of berries into several equal parts. They were "thinking" mathematical constructs, and only later did they devise a formal arithmetic language.

I agree. I used to think language was only a form of communicating between two people,but it seems to also be a way we communicate or reason within our own self.