Philosophy Now Forum

Language is a tool made by reason to understand things in reality. As new words are invented, things in reality can be articulated more clearly and profound. How language is separated from mere babble is the use of Reason that unlocks deeper meanings to that word, which can carry different yet interconnected meanings. That's language in a nutshell.

For most of Homo Sapien's existence, there was no language. Language did eventually arise through an evolutionary process, but it wasn't exclusively through reasoning, e.g. echoing sounds. Reasoning played a predominant role in the later stages of Homo Sapien's existence.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:For most of Homo Sapien's existence, there was no language. Language did eventually arise through an evolutionary process, but it wasn't exclusively through reasoning, e.g. echoing sounds. Reasoning played a predominant role in the later stages of Homo Sapien's existence.

PhilX

But surely they were conscious before language, which manifested reason. They couldn't have been just a bunch of dum-Duma playing with fire if there were prehistoric remains of art and tools and such.

Sam I. Elle wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:For most of Homo Sapien's existence, there was no language. Language did eventually arise through an evolutionary process, but it wasn't exclusively through reasoning, e.g. echoing sounds. Reasoning played a predominant role in the later stages of Homo Sapien's existence.

PhilX

But surely they were conscious before language, which manifested reason. They couldn't have been just a bunch of dum-Duma playing with fire if there were prehistoric remains of art and tools and such.

That's an assumption that can't be confirmed. Art isn't reasoning and tools came relatively late in the history of HS. Being conscious doesn't imply reasoning as there are retarded HS that can't reason well or at all in present times.

PhilX

Language is simply sounds and scribbles. You can only understand that these sounds and scribbles refer to, or represent, other things that aren't sounds and scribbles if you already understand the concept of representation - that things (symbols) can refer to other things. It seems to me that it is inherent of experiences themselves to be about things. There is an aboutness to my experiences. My experiences inform me of things. So my experiences are representations, or a model, of the world around me. This inherent aboutness to our experiences is what allows us humans to use symbolism as a form of communication - of using sounds and scribbles to refer to other things - like apples, chairs, and mothers - in order to communicate.

Evidence indicates that language predates HS.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/la ... s-language

Sam I. Elle wrote:Language is a tool made by reason to understand things in reality. As new words are invented, things in reality can be articulated more clearly and profound. How language is separated from mere babble is the use of Reason that unlocks deeper meanings to that word, which can carry different yet interconnected meanings. That's language in a nutshell.

Circular logic and pure nonsense and babble!

We have had language for thousands of years, with out really understanding reality, why we have had superstition for so very long, and only science would purge the superstition!

Language doesn't begin only with humans. It's been around long before that as animals, including humans, congregate into societies primitive or more advanced. If animals, long before humans existed, were able to communicate with each other by way of gesture and sound, it's obvious that humans expedited that kind of development. To ask when language came about is a futile question.

Sam I. Elle wrote:Language is a tool made by reason to understand things in reality. As new words are invented, things in reality can be articulated more clearly and profound. How language is separated from mere babble is the use of Reason that unlocks deeper meanings to that word, which can carry different yet interconnected meanings. That's language in a nutshell.

So what is the meaning of a word? You start off by suggesting the word refers to 'reality', but then you say its meaning is unlocked by 'reason' (and that there is more than one layer of meaning). 'Reality' is usually thought off as something 'out there', independent of us, but 'reason' is something that happens in my head. If words are about my understanding of reality, then there is no guarantee that my understanding of reality is necessarily a correct understanding; the words I invent and the meanings I unlock may simply be wrong. In other words, if language is a tool it isn't an effective one.

Londoner wrote:
So what is the meaning of a word? You start off by suggesting the word refers to 'reality', but then you say its meaning is unlocked by 'reason' (and that there is more than one layer of meaning). 'Reality' is usually thought off as something 'out there', independent of us, but 'reason' is something that happens in my head. If words are about my understanding of reality, then there is no guarantee that my understanding of reality is necessarily a correct understanding; the words I invent and the meanings I unlock may simply be wrong. In other words, if language is a tool it isn't an effective one.

Yes, there are limits to our own understanding, but it can be effective if you're willing to be patient and find ways to expand beyond our limits.

Sam I. Elle wrote: Yes, there are limits to our own understanding, but it can be effective if you're willing to be patient and find ways to expand beyond our limits.

We cannot expand beyond our limits.

Londoner wrote:

Sam I. Elle wrote:Language is a tool made by reason to understand things in reality. As new words are invented, things in reality can be articulated more clearly and profound. How language is separated from mere babble is the use of Reason that unlocks deeper meanings to that word, which can carry different yet interconnected meanings. That's language in a nutshell.

So what is the meaning of a word? You start off by suggesting the word refers to 'reality', but then you say its meaning is unlocked by 'reason' (and that there is more than one layer of meaning). 'Reality' is usually thought off as something 'out there', independent of us, but 'reason' is something that happens in my head. If words are about my understanding of reality, then there is no guarantee that my understanding of reality is necessarily a correct understanding; the words I invent and the meanings I unlock may simply be wrong. In other words, if language is a tool it isn't an effective one.

I agree with Londoner that "reason is something that happens in my head". Language is often used as tool for instance when you use explicit instructions for assembling a television set. More often language is used to define and create reality. Since reality changes according to e.g. the weather, the season, and who happens to be the president of the US, the use of language both reflects and creates reality.

Sam I. Elle wrote: ..., there are limits to our own understanding, but it can be effective if you're willing to be patient and find ways to expand beyond our limits.

What do you propose are the limits to our own understanding. I, for One, certainly do not have any limits.

No, it's I who do not have any limits

Belinda wrote:No, it's I who do not have any limits

So true.