UnbornTao

Yeah.

Right, I need to eat some food.

Yeah, my best answer is for us to contemplate what languag eis on our own and maybe then share the results here. Because I don't think it's something that can be easily solved.

Hmm, okay. Let me take some time to contemplate and to think about what to say next.

Feeling automatically and personally invalidated when hearing that something or someone is or may be conformist.

Agree to disagree For example, there's no "message" as an object. What's objectively there is perception, sound, etc.

@Salvijus i just edited that in. Distance, movement, patterns, reactions. To me, that's what comes to mind when watching the video above. So the question remains: what is language?

I am not exactly sure what you mean by that. Distance, movement, patterns, reactions. To me, that's what comes to mind when watching the video above.

You believe?

What is reverberation again?

Oh, there's a second video:

https://christitus.com/windows-to-linux/

What distro do you use? Those laptops are pretty good.

We seem to be running in circles. - OK, let's say that everything reverberates. Isn't there some kind of leap that needs to occur so that the reverberation does more than simply reverberate - so that another being can make sense of the sound, rather than merely perceiving it as meaningless phenomena? (Here, let's take 'reverberation' as sound being heard by someone.) As a simple exercise, consider two people talking. Sounds are made, and the sounds reverberate. BLAH BLAH BLAH. Is that all? We're reading these pixels and making sense of them as we read right now. We are doing something with the pixels, it seems to me. The pixels are just a particular configuration on a screen, forming certain shapes. What can this tell us about language? I'm not conscious of the nature of language yet; I'm sharing some observations that might or might not be true. The point is to take up the questioning for oneself.

Oh no! @Princess Arabia

@Yeah Yeah Got it, thank you.

Was this written by AI?

😍

Hey, thanks for chipping in. I'd say this is an advocacy for basic common sense and rationality, especially as applied to spirituality. Critical thinking matters. "Belief system" and "cult" are different, though the distinction feels a bit fuzzy to me right now. I'm pointing this out to indicate a certain direction we, as people, tend to go in. And to watch out for this "need" to believe stuff.

https://www.clearerthinking.org/post/what-makes-something-a-cult This site is a good example of high-quality rationality, although I have yet to become more familiar with it.

@Yeah Yeah It's OK to feel this way, can you allow it to be there? Feel it, but don't act it out. It will pass eventually, and you'll be glad you let it be.

Maybe Kant is a good example. At the risk of oversimplifying, he changed the trajectory of philosophy by proposing that the mind does not perceive reality as it is. That may sound lame on paper for some of us - but in this context, what idea doesn't? What form would it even take? I think we tend to assume that an original thought has to look a certain way (like being exceptionally extravagant) - but what way, exactly? What made it original may have had more to do with the origin of the insight itself - experiential - and with the fact that he had authentically seen something true and profound, made a genuine breakthrough, and was able to communicate it in a way that was effective. Just some thoughts.

@AerisVahnEphelia For curiosity's sake, you might be interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_pluribus_unum

What is? Didn't we have to invent language at some point in history? Could it be considered a historical development rather than a discovery? In that example, I imagine it's not about a particular language, it's something much more fundamental. The association she learned to make had to go beyond any English word or particular language. Exactly, this is the main issue we're discussing, and the assumption being addressed: that language is an objective reality or exists objectively.

That's fair. I've used W8 and Vista, I think. Don't have much to say, honestly, other than Windows 8's Start menu felt clunky. Linux can be more reliable and stable than Windows, depending on the use case and provided it fulfills your needs. Mint is a good example of this, and it's based on Debian which has a fairly conservative philosophy behind its design. Apparently it may not be the best for tinkering. Arch and Fedora are generally considered better for bleeding-edge stuff. But yeah.