we recently had a neuro-linguistics program (sortof... i believe it's been wastefully diluted) as part of our course. if i'm not wrong... 'neuro-linguistics' refer to the skill of using language to influence ours' and others' thought processes. a very core and generally accepted theory of linguistic relativism... nothing much to discuss abt that.
but i think i submit to a form of linguistic determinism. i believe that we MAY be able to extend thought beyond language for a bit... but not very far. and that limit is necessarily determined by our linguistic capability. for example, considering the vocab we had in the Aristotelian era, we might be able to conceive of the existence of matter... but i doubt that we can ever come up with an inkling of anti-matter, precisely because of the lack of the word 'matter' itself. ultimately, language still serves as the limiting factor to thought.
esp when we are talking about precision in thought. the words 'hate' and 'loathe' convey various degrees of the sentiment of dislike... but they carry their own semantic nuances (distinction here... not referring to connotations). it's a bit hard to describe it... lolz perhaps the vocab for this haven't been developed~ but yea it's definitely different to say 'not like' and 'double not like', like as in 1984 style.
so what is it exactly that make words so liberating? what makes the precise and aesthetic expression of a thought in language so ultimately gratifying? just the way the mind works? bah too incomplete and dismissive an explanation...
yep i'm really in a blogging mood. it's not a ki essay so i can't be bothered to put up a complete argument... just random thoughts during the course.
incidentally... he doesn't read i know and he's in camp doing ushering duty for commissioning parade (haiz sad) but happy bday shang =)
Name: Foo Guo Zhong Melvyn
Age: 19+
Affiliations: MSHS (Pri), Rosyth, RI, RJC, SFX (LoG)
Bday: 14th Nov
Email: mel_protoss@hotmail.com
we recently had a neuro-linguistics program (sortof... i believe it's been wastefully diluted) as part of our course. if i'm not wrong... 'neuro-linguistics' refer to the skill of using language to influence ours' and others' thought processes. a very core and generally accepted theory of linguistic relativism... nothing much to discuss abt that.
but i think i submit to a form of linguistic determinism. i believe that we MAY be able to extend thought beyond language for a bit... but not very far. and that limit is necessarily determined by our linguistic capability. for example, considering the vocab we had in the Aristotelian era, we might be able to conceive of the existence of matter... but i doubt that we can ever come up with an inkling of anti-matter, precisely because of the lack of the word 'matter' itself. ultimately, language still serves as the limiting factor to thought.
esp when we are talking about precision in thought. the words 'hate' and 'loathe' convey various degrees of the sentiment of dislike... but they carry their own semantic nuances (distinction here... not referring to connotations). it's a bit hard to describe it... lolz perhaps the vocab for this haven't been developed~ but yea it's definitely different to say 'not like' and 'double not like', like as in 1984 style.
so what is it exactly that make words so liberating? what makes the precise and aesthetic expression of a thought in language so ultimately gratifying? just the way the mind works? bah too incomplete and dismissive an explanation...
yep i'm really in a blogging mood. it's not a ki essay so i can't be bothered to put up a complete argument... just random thoughts during the course.
incidentally... he doesn't read i know and he's in camp doing ushering duty for commissioning parade (haiz sad) but happy bday shang =)