now we have listed the problem....

the problem right now is simple…

How can we understand if both logic and language are inadequate?

that is the problem we face today… How do you describe love if both
logic and language are inadequate to describe love…

How do you describe art if logic and language are inadequate?

We are faced with these problems of philosophy where our language and
our logic is not capable of describing them…these very important problems
of philosophy… Love… art… who are we…

the language and logic we use right now is inadequate to describe the experiences
we have…philosophy is supposed to explain or understand the human experience
and it can’t… perhaps the sterile nature of philosophy that I have written about
before is because our philosophical language/logic is unable to describe
what we are seeing and feeling right now…

we are alienated from our society but how do we describe this alienation?
what language do we use to describe this alienation from the ism’s and ideologies
that have driven society for the last several centuries…

I think we have narrowed down part of the problem that philosophy
has had over the last 100 years… its language and logic is incapable
of describing modern life… our ability to understand has been limited
by our language and logic… so we need to expand our language and/or
expand our logic…

a very tall task indeed…

Kropotkin

Communication/ words/speaking are designed to be accompanied by body language and sound. Had we no sight or hearing language would have developed different, perhaps?? It may have taken a road to where it would fulfill the inadequacy, maybe.