SLUG / GNHLUG Durham - Mon 9 Oct - Lojban

[aluminumsulfate at earthlink.net]

ugh.  qu=6Fted-printable enc=6Fding...=20 );

   From: Fred <puissante at lrc.puissante.com>
   Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:20:44 -0400

   >
   >   What if the language we speak affects how we think? If that's true, what
   > if we spoke a language that had a basis in logic? Would it lead to more
   > logical thought? "Lojban", a language based on predicate logic with an
   > unambiguous grammar, is the second generation of a language conceived to
   > answer those questions.

   My 2 cents:

   While I find it laudable that someone has gone through the trouble of=20
   creating an unambiguous language, we humans by nature are creatures of=20
   ambiguity. If such a language were to be actually used by those other than=

Do you mean that ambiguity is somehow a necessary and/or essential
function of the human mind?  (FYI: Lojban is *grammatically*
unambiguous, but does leave you room for *semantic* ambiguity.)

   Personally, I don't think that language defines how we think -- but
   it does= =20 play a large role on how we *express* what we
   think. But because I think=20

Language plays a huge role in how information flows through the
world...  in our minds, between our minds and the minds of others, and
in the "mind" of society (viewed as an organism).  You are what you
eat.  It's true for your body and it's true for your mind.  Many
people are fed information in languages which embody inherent
assumptions about reality.  Just look at how many people think the
words "good" and "bad" have a real English meaning.  If people rely
(as they often do) on culturally popular patterns of thought
(good/bad, the excluded middle, me/them, similar-therefore-the-same),
they breed incorrect, and frequently tragic, misconceptions.

   not we tend to think more visually than the normal population? Or
   just how= =20 does the "normal" population think anyway?

The "normal" population doesn't think.