UnbornTao

This seems to me like a balanced take, in principle. For example, if we were to temporarily eliminate the entire possibility of language, what would we then have, relative to a banana? A perception of something? And then - what is a "thing"? To what extent does language not only influence but also create our experience? It's difficult to separate what is there from what is added. I'd rather not speculate too much, and instead proceed step by step - like a meditation.

But what's true? If it were possible to know what language really is, then that understanding would take a different form than just a notion about it. Isn't that kind of thinking itself dependent on the thing being investigated? When we examine our knowledge of language, how much of it relies on language simply to exist? I haven't done this successfully, but we could ask (as a meditation, perhaps): What is an experience without - or prior to - the existence of language? The goal being creating "language" from the ground up. Not an easy topic.

The purpose of this journal is to share questions, humor, miscellaneous creative content, and raw reflections on personal empowerment and consciousness. My goals are to deepen my experiential understanding of these topics, improve my communication skills, have fun, and help others see things in a new light.

Same thing, like okey doke.

@Ramasta9 You might be a past user with a different account, and that's OK with me.

Using Windows.

I think 'mathematicians' would fit better there.

John Travolta and Nancy Cartwright (Bart Simpsons' voice actress) are Scientologists. ¡Ay, caramba!

That's the thing, it's a definition. Could you have come up with it if this possibility didn't exist? Ironically, without language, our knowledge about language might never have come to pass in the first place. Without a reference to the content of language, what is language? I ran out of synonyms this morning.

I see no change.

Is it me, or has the main website's width on mobile changed slightly?

Okay, but I also already think I know what language is. (!) That's why we question and remain open, in a way. Do we really understand what language is? It might be that we're standing on artificial ground - intellect, conclusion, belief, opinion, answers. Which is to say, we take our experience of language entirely for granted as if it were the same as realizing its nature. Set aside everything you think you know about language and look into it - in your experience right now.

If that was the case, avoid it in the first place or at least disclose it. To be clear, this refers to content generated by AI. It's not about grammar correction or the like.

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?