The Absurdity of 'Thinking in Language'

the author's site ^ | 1972 | Dallas Willard

[Yeti]

The idea that you think in words is kind of like --- like ...oh, what's the word? It's on the tip of my tongue! I know what I am trying to say, and if I wasn't trying to think of it right now the word would just come right out....

Oh, well. You know what I mean.

[Semi Civil Servant]

9%2798 *79 *7(87980- {}[u@

<>_+0~~ ^38 68 %#6* #678 \]3[]?3$!` @ #4 05=--=/,.\]95&8 90

3*9 78#2 1#`- 8 87/;''

/85%# @7(7 )8^$##^%*&8 &8(87

[x]

Whether or not we need words to think, we do need words to talk about thinking. One could characterize mental activity as chemical, rather than verbal. Much of it consists in reactions that are too instantaneous or too vague to be put into words. But how do you render this in a form that you can communicate to other people? You need language.

Words are inadequate to convey some reactions: witness the failure of "stream of consciousness" in fiction writing. The true "stream of consciousness" is subverbal or nonverbal or at most only partially verbal.

But what would we be if we had to rely on mental activity that does not make use of words? What could we think without words? Wouldn't it have to be very simple?

I wonder if truly subverbal or nonverbal activity isn't primarily emotional or sensual or at most action-oriented. It says "fear this," "this is bitter," "this feels good," "movement there" or "run!"

Perhaps I'm totally wrong, but when we get away from the bioemotional, aren't we already on the road to language? "Fear this" or "this is warm" gets perceived in the skin. More complex relations and qualities may not be so easily felt on a physical level.

And the senses bring us information that we feel strongly and directly, and other information that doesn't impress itself strongly on our emotions. Language allows us greater access to the second group. We can express not just that this or that is hot or moving, but that this object is to the left of that and behind the other thing, without pointing or needing to have the objects in our field of vision.

Consider color. Colors had to be invented or discovered by human cultures. You might see something of a certain appearance, but you couldn't say what you saw until you had a word for it. And the full palette of colors that we see today took time to develop.

[Yeti]

Musicians and mathematicians are often the same people.

And yet popular culture often presents these as diametrically opposed personality types.

[unspun]

Truth is, I can hardly read this kind of BS, written as it is with very few concrete nouns. The eyes just glaze over.

Serously and uncontentiously, I'd be really interested in knowing if you've had any "personality" or "temperament" tests. I wouldn't be surprised at all if those who lean "objectivist" or "logical positivist" tend to be "left brained" and the Interneters of them, more ISTJ or INTJ in "MBTI/Meyers-Briggs" terms. The opposite for the opposite, of course. (I tend to be INFP, though I tend to splash around.)

But then again, this last paragraph might cause your eyes to glaze or at least roll, too! ;-`

[Yeti]

85%# @7(7 )8^$##^%*&8 &8(87

My thoughts exactly.

[unspun]

Oh, well. You know what I mean.

Eggsactly, chicken!

[unspun]

u: "If you ever need a "character witness," I'll vouch for you! "

You sure are a character, so it's easy.

[RightWhale]

I've been hanging out in both departments recently. It's amusing to notice those two students over there in complex analysis class are also in the chamber ensemble, English horn and cello, and both in the 90s on the Riemann space test. Not everyone, but it happens often enough that you do notice. And that's Einstein on second violin.

[fifteendogs]

How do you take into consideration those people who are telepathic. They have no language, they only have understanding.

[unspun]

My friend Rachy is... a chemist and computer programmer AND a concert level pianist and organist.

Must like keyboards and charts.

[unspun]

How do you take into consideration those people who are telepathic. They have no language, they only have understanding.

Wow, I just had a feeling that question had been asked before... and even replied to! 8-o

[Consort]

Using the concept of Occam's Razor, everything is exactly what we collectively think it is.

The Law of Thought.

Maybe.

[gcruse]

I haven't read that.  My favorite is the Origin of Consciousness
in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.

[unspun]

...and of course they do have language. But what is language even, if it isn't 'just' another thing our mind addresses when it wants to?

[Yeti]

MBTI/Meyers-Briggs" terms.

I'd be careful about internalizing that kind of label, if I were you. The results of those tests could tend to be self fulfilling prophecies.

By accepting a positive("I am stronger in language skills") we implicitly acknowledge the negative("I can't do math"), and give ourselves permission to allow those skills to atrophy. We all have the centers in our brain that correspond to any of those skills.

Likewise with "thinking" or "feeling" and "introverted" or "extroverted." Introverts care about what others think, extroverts are capable of introspection. They are false dichotomies.

[ijcr]

If this theory is to be credible then all humans must"Think"
similarly and equally. That the processes of thought in an Amazonian Indian are on par with that of say Steven Pinker.

It also fails to examine, as an example the former Soviet Union, which broke up into 15 states not geographically (the easy way) but linguistically. The case for the divisions was made by the statement "that we all think alike".

The author may be confusing biological functions with thinking; hunger,thirst,pain,an erection etc.etc.

Surely, some study of brain death would reveal that while
these biological functions remain, all thought has ceased.

[unspun]

People can give a body more things to read.... ;-`

Hope to read at least a bit of each reference here....

[Mike Darancette]

Thought associations seem to be different between Englishmen and Chinese, for example.

How about English speakers and the French? What is it about the French language that causes them to be so insufferable?

[gcruse]

Thanks. I couldn't read much either, but hadn't thought about concrete nouns. I'll look for that the next time one of these sponges-strung-out-on-a-line impersonates prose.