i have a question about how we name things. like for example you see aretarded person.are they really retarded or do we 'the majority’call them that becase they are not like us.like we may be retarded if a smarter human being comes along and calls us retarded just becase we are dumb’not deaf’i just dont agree with some names people call others or things most are unlogicaly and can mislead the thinking process.somtimes i find thinking harder becase of these fauls i have to think of this anology just to get to a point in the process and by this time i have already forgoten what was the point of the whole thing.iwish there was a job to reconstrute the laguage use so we can think better.any ideas?
The problem with languge is that the words we use already have a prior meaning attached to them. Even the act of thinking is contrued in languge. (Heres an interesting thought… if languge and thought are interchangeable could they be aspects or facets of something as yet unseen, something within the human psyche as yet undescribed).
What we must beware of are the power of labels such as the one u have described. once a label is attached to a person it sets like concrete. It does not allow for any future change in that person, it solidifies around them. it makes it easy for us to deal with them. For example, Oh he’s a thief he’s been to court therefore we do not have to think further on the matter. Once a thief always a thief.
O 
nce so labelled the individual may come to believe the label and internalise it themselves.
does this help?
DS