The Absurdity of 'Thinking in Language'

the author's site ^ | 1972 | Dallas Willard

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for this engaging article, unspun! Here are a few Einstein quotes for the discussion:

“I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”

"These thoughts did not come in any verbal formulation. I rarely think in words at all. A thought comes, and I may try to express it in words afterward."

I strongly relate to these quotes and to the above article. Words fail – all the time for me.

Language is wholly inadequate to describe my direct experiences in love, peace, joy – much less what I feel when I’m “in the spirit” worshipping the Lord. Likewise, in reading the Scriptures – the eyes read the words, but the Spirit reads the Word. There is no comparison and no way to explain it verbally!

On a more earthly note, when I pick up a book on theoretical physics – the words, formulae and diagrams fade into motions of images as I try to grasp the concept being explored. I don’t know how the material could be understood otherwise.

[unspun]

It shouldn't be just a personality thing. You read the article and it's got all this "intentional states" (is "internal" meant here?), "flowing t-states," "signs," "operating with signs," "imaging a word" (not to be confused with "using a word"), "conditions, state, relations, or properties of y ..."

I've got to eat and I left my computer's power supply at work, so... hold that thought (the words will likely stay in the server).

But let me ask you, why do you want to describe something as nebulous (and even that term is too concrete) as the intentional life of man in concrete terms?

That is like trying to knock a hammer into the breeze.

[unspun]

Language is wholly inadequate to describe my direct experiences in love, peace, joy ? much less what I feel when I?m ?in the spirit? worshipping the Lord. Likewise, in reading the Scriptures ? the eyes read the words, but the Spirit reads the Word. There is no comparison and no way to explain it verbally!

On a more earthly note, when I pick up a book on theoretical physics ? the words, formulae and diagrams fade into motions of images as I try to grasp the concept being explored. I don?t know how the material could be understood otherwise.

Thanks for the elegance of your examples, A-G. Supper beckons, but it's funny why this would be difficult to accede to!

This Willard thread may end quick or go on for some time, but it is a big, big challenge to some (really to us all!) to consider that even the essential nature of our own thoughts may well be beyond our comprehension -- to say nothing about its being expressible!

[fifteendogs]

I was speaking of the english language. It is rich in descriptive terms because it incorporates many other languages.

The reference to radio was to try and illustrate the difference between telepathy and a structured language. Telepathy provides no opportunity to use ones imagination. Understanding is complete.

Listening to the radio presents a challenge not experienced before with telepathy. Radio forces one to "imagine" the physical characteristics of the people who are speaking. Radio forces one to "define" the environment from which the speaker exists. There are no clues other than the nuances of the language and the tone utilized by the speaker.It is a rich and wonderful experience.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your kind words and quick reply! I hope you enjoyed your supper!

it's funny why this would be difficult to accede to!

Actually, that doesn’t surprise me. There is a mindset that wishes to be the “master of its own universe” and is loathe to accept that any thing is beyond the reach of logic or reason - both of which require language of some sort.

Nevertheless, my direct experience strongly speaks to the contrary!

[FITZ]

There is no language structure, there is only understanding.

Facial expressions are one non-language form of communication. So are other hand-gestures.

[Hank Kerchief]

Well people pay quite a bit of money for these musings that are not translated into words, but are rather translated into 3D models and 2D drawings. So evidently it is not "words" which define the thinking, much less make them useful.

People pay a lot of money to Chiropracters too, because they believe they are "useful." If you could not explain in simple language how your designs were going to benefit me, you would not get one penny from me (just as no chiropracter does). But, P.T. Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute. Some con artists actually believe they are performing a useful service.

I am not accusing you of anything. I am certain you intend to provide designs that are of real value to your clients. My point is only that what someone is willing to pay for is proof of nothing.

Hank

[js1138]

I'm with VR on the need for concrete imagery. Abstractions are fine as long as they summarize concrete objects, events or relationships.

I took Meyers-Briggs twice. First one was INTP, the second was taken the week after 911 and I tested INFP. The F/T scales were mixed in both cases. The other three scales leaned completely in one direction.

[Consort]

How is the English language limited in comprehension, and compared to what other language?

Telepathy provides no opportunity to use ones imagination. Understanding is complete.

That's what I meant by "unfiltered".

I see what you meant in the radio analogy. That may also apply to reading books with no illustrations, or listening to a science fiction story about a strange imaginary place.

[FITZ]

Most of what you describe is correctly called imagination, a very important part of human consciousness, but it is not, in a technical sense "thinking." I personally do not care if you want to call it thinking, but the rational process is only possible using language, and until you have identified those events and

I think what we do at night when we're sleeping ---the dreams and nightmares are an example of thinking without words. It's not musing, it's our brains sorting out the days events, our fears and problems ---and it's almost all language-less ---our dreams and nightmares are symbolic but they are our way of making sense of everything. The deepest form of thinking we can do because it's our subconscious working.

[fifteendogs]

True, but these extraneous gyrations are used only to improve the level of understanding of the language being used to communicate. I have never experienced deafness so I am unable to understand how much is communicated in sign language. I have experienced silent communication without the benefit of visual enhancements and was able to completely understand what was being communicated.

[FITZ]

I think facial expressions are more important than verbal communication. Words can be saying one thing but the look on someone's face might be telling you a whole nother story.

[FITZ]

I think that's one big flaw in written communication ---like what we do here, sometimes someone says something in jest that doesn't get taken that way. Language and words are just one form of expression. I've seen people who don't speak the same language communicate quite well ---but they have to both be open to alternative forms of communicating.

[fifteendogs]

But what if you are not in physical proximity of the person with whom you are communicating? How do you convey facial and hand signals if the person you are addressing cannot see you?

[FITZ]

That would be the limitations of non-verbal communication ---you have to be in physical proximity. Trying to communicate an intense dream to someone is always difficult because you can't put the thoughts into words, you can't convey the sense of dread a nightmare gave you. Even if you try writing a dream down for yourself, later it just sounds weird. Sometimes at night you reason things out better than you do could have while awake because you aren't limited to conscious words.

[D-fendr]

Is imagining thinking?

Can you remember a tree from your childhood and imagine climbing it?

Can you do so without narrating your imagined actions with words, just climb it in your mind?

Would you then be thinking?

[fifteendogs]

Language and words are just one form of expression

And that is the problem. All languages depend upon a learning period of its components. The less knowledge one has of a language, the more limited the ability to communicate. You may have a perfect thought, but due to your limited understanding of your language, the less likely you are to communicate you thought. If you were telepathic, you could communicate your perfect thought and the person with whom you were communicating, would completely understand.

[unspun]

Actually, that doesn’t surprise me. There is a mindset that wishes to be the “master of its own universe” and is loathe to accept that any thing is beyond the reach of logic or reason - both of which require language of some sort.

Nevertheless, my direct experience strongly speaks to the contrary!

I suggest that everyone's does, don't you? All one has to do is experiment.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Thinking is merely the mental refinement of a thought or idea.

[Under the Radar]

So does Dr. Temple Grandin. There are a lot of high-functioning, intelligent folks on the right-hand side of the autistic/Asperger bellcurve.