Listening to "Words Change the World" I came to agree with Elizabeth Spelke that language does connect thoughts in our human minds. As humans we rely on this ability to communicate thoughts with one another and ourselves. This trait is what separates us from that of other animals. Lastly this is what has made our advancement through this world possible.
For a simple explanation on how we use words to explain concept thoughts imagine you're trying to explain to one of your friends how to get to you residence. There is only so far you can show your friend by just pointing in one direction. Instead we use descriptive words to give directions on how to get there. For example "Turn left at the stop sign by Walmart". Without these words friends would never make it over in time for dinner.
During the experiment, described by Charles Ferneyhough, a rat was dropped into a white rectangular room and was made to look for a biscuit. During the experiment only half of the rats found the biscuit. After the experiment was changed adding one blue wall to the room the rats still scored the same. Elizabeth Spelke actually conducted a similar experiment with young children. The results were similar till the children reached about 6 years of age. That's when children used language to connect the thought of "left of the blue wall" and the data showed.
As weird as this may sound but I've actually thought about what human civilizations would be like without language. I often think it would be just the opposite of civilization. I believe the fact that we are able to communicate our thoughts and ideas to one another is the reason we have advanced as far as we have in areas like technology and exploration. It's this passing of complex thoughts that separates us from monkeys.
Over all humans are meaning making creatures. Without language we can't communicate complex thoughts or directions to one another making us no different from animals. Experiments have been conducted with the data proving this statement to be valid. Without language we as humans wouldn't have advanced in history the way we have.
I completely agree with your theory that without language us humans would be "the opposite of civilization..." Civilization is defined as "the stage of human social development and organization that is considered most advanced." We -humans- would no longer be the dominant species, but what would? Science has shown that dolphins, whales, bats, and other animals can communicate through oral and body signals, but language is not identical with communication. Although many studies have been done on the apprehension primates possess on human language through sign language, it is still not proven they can actually understand what they are "saying." Thus the closest species to human communication would have to be neanderthals, although this too leads to speculation as to what truly defines the human language. In the end the everlasting debate of human language leaves the question of possible future dominance virtually unanswerable until the human species itself has gone extinct.
ReplyDeleteRegarding communication of direction, without language would humans be truly ignorant to direction? Although you stated the communication of direction would be impossible, I believe this is where instinct would take part. If we could not communicate direction, would it truly be necessary to do so? Studies have shown many animals can find their way to and from point A and B simply through their natural instinct. This being said, is communication of direction from fellow humans at all necessary at this point? Also, if language is what helps civilization progress into what we are today, then where would humans need direction to without knowledge of specified or existing destinations? These are just a few examples of discussions all over the world concerning language of which many will go forever unanswered and be forced to simply remain theories.
I totally agree with your statement that "humans are meaning making creatures". We as humans develop meanings of words and objects in our heads, whether it be by definition slash understanding or by our own take on what something may mean to us, individually.
ReplyDeleteFor example, when we were kids and our parents held up a picture of an object and connected a word with that object, we automatically put two and two together, and assumed that the word assembled with the object were equals. That is us understanding the meaning of the object by definition.
But when we develop our own personal meaning for something, say love, is when we formulate meaning in a different sense. For instance, the literal definition for love is " a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person". Only that's just from the dictionary. To one person, love could just mean sex, but to another love is interpreted as simple care or compassion for another. The word meaning itself, has many different interpretations. It all just depends on whether we want to convey the definition as our own personal meaning or the literal "meaning".
As humans we make meanings come to life according to how we think. I also agree that we depend on thoughts to communicate. As all of humans determine meanings of things, and interpret those meanings into thoughts, and the thoughts into language we develop communication. And without the proper language or understanding of that certain language, we can't assemble proper communication.
I agree with your thought about humans not being different from animals if language didn't exist. We would be just like the rats in the lab experiment wondering around and not able to tell left from right. If it wasn't for language, us as humans wouldn't be so advanced in technology and scientific discoveries. We would probably still be stuck in a cave trying to find a way to start a fire. However, in order for language to be as successful as it is now, there must be modifications to some words so that other nations can understand what you're saying. If you speak Spanish you'd understand because some words in Mexico can mean a vulgar word in Cuba or vise versa. Meaning in words are different depending on the region and culture people have in that area and when it comes to communicating language gets really complex when it comes to translating from English to Japanese, Chinese, or even Hebrew.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that while listening to "Words Change the World" I understand the agreement of Elizabeth Spelkel on that statement. You made excellent points in your blog on how you believe without language there would be no civilization and your explanation on how to receive directions to your dorm. There was actually very little disagreeable statements in your article, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteHowever in your last paragraph you explain how "Without language we can't communicate complex thoughts or directions to one another making us no different from animals." I would have to disagree with this statement. When they did the experiment on the younger children, at the age of 6, they did indeed learn a since of direction and had adult like instinct. I believe even if we did not have language, we would not be like animals completely. We would not be as intelligent as we are with language but we would be able to do physical work for ourselves.
Also, as humans we were born with more ability for survival instincts. For example, we do not grow a coat of fur, therefore we would instinctively know to build, or find shelter for warmth.
Therefore, I agree with your overall statement. Humans would not be nearly to this complex civilization we live in today without language. Without language we would not be like animals we would be like humans, without language. Also depending on how you interpret language and witch form it is in. There can be nonverbal, verbal, sign language, reading, writing and through your actions.