There are five types of Thought Machine: the Mexica, the Indo-Europeans in Greco-Roman and Hindi-Buddhist modes, the Semites, and the Sinitics. Which begs the question, what are the instructions for building a Thought Machine? Clearly it is has to do with being able to write things down. (And sitting. Lots of sitting. So much sitting that one must follow Boddhidharma’s lead.) Or is that phrasing the question in such a way as to only produce an answer I was already looking for?
有考試。如果你看不懂這句話，你的看法，我不在乎。看得懂的人下面請回答我的問題
Clearly the transition from Orality to Manuscript culture is responsible for the production of the Thought Machine.
We can look at at least five different societies which have produced Thought Machines - the above listed. Using simple Aristotelian logic, what is the genus of these species of Thought Machine? Or should we not even play the hierarchy tree game? Perhaps we should learn more Deleuze and how to do the rhizomatics he hints at, and which I am not blessed with enough time to learn yet. Does the Indo-European Thought Machine only produce certain parts? Are these certain parts mass produced simply because the Greeks devised marks for the still tongue and the kissy lips? Can we understand the Sinitic Thought Machine? Does the Sinitic Thought Machine only produce certain parts because of the squiggly lines? And what a tragedy, the loss of the Mexica Thought Machine on the Bonfires of the Wolves of God.
That is very true. And very significant to the development of humanity.
Differing languages vary the propagation rate and endurance of thought. The more ideal the language, the less experience with reality is required for thoughts to propagate and endure posing as reality itself.
The most ideal language would communicate with exact precision, every significant detail concerning a thought with all of its nuances and relevancy. The closer a language comes to doing that, the less experience with physical reality is required to confirm the intent and accuracy of the communication.
With ease, one person can relay not merely an implication of a thought, but an entire paradigm. The usefulness of the simple communication then causes easy propagation and endurance.
When communicating the concerning thoughts of a situation becomes far easier than experiencing them, people forgo the experience so as to acquire perception more for less effort and risk. Eventually the communication gains priority of believability over direct experiences due to the number of consistencies with prior presumed knowledge. Communication manipulation becomes The Matrix of total mental control.
… all due to a relatively perfect language and too dense of a society, people using people against people.
Except that language is a biological phenomenon. Arguing there is an ideal language is an anachronism akin to arguing the ideal tree or ideal pig. Additionally, this presumes thought has no physical component and can be transmitted as 100% information. Not particularly sure this is germane my OP.
Additionally, how do differing languages vary the propagation rate and endurance of thought? There is a presumption here thought exists outside of the language expressing it. I don’t agree with the reification of thought only to abstract it. I question the Platonism/Hegelianism (although both radically different from each other) underlying this.
Are you referring to the ways in which a set of sound waves are transmitted by being transmuted into graphical marks on a surface and then copied?
And a homosapian is just a biological phenomenon?
And a brain is just a biological phenomenon?
And a tree is just a biological phenomenon?
And a sperm is just a biological phenomenon?
And a computer is just a molecular phenomenon?
And a biological phenomenon is just a molecular phenomenon?
So actually a language would “just be a molecular phenomenon”.
But then a molecular phenomenon is just a subatomic particle phenomenon.
And a subatomic particle is just an energy phenomenon.
So actually a language is “just an energy phenomenon”.
But then what isn’t?
This entire discussion and all others are “just an energy phenomenon”. You are “just an energy phenomenon”.
One might question the rationality in speaking to it.
Perhaps that had something to do with why I didn’t argue that there was one. I said, “the closer you get to one” and “the most ideal…”.
You can presume that if you wish. I said nothing of the kind, nor implied it.
Well, they are all just energy phenomenon, so it doesn’t really matter, does it.
Well, an intelligent person might come to that conclusion considering the ability to translate between languages without a word to word exchange. How would a thought get from one “biological phenomenon” to another if there wasn’t some medium for it to exist in that wasn’t either language?
Some people believe that a language is merely a storage medium for the thoughts for recording and transmitting. It is much like wealth; Is physical money the wealth itself, or is it merely a physical representation of the wealth used to store and transmit wealth?
This isn’t racism. It is linguistics. The different languages drive the different forms of thought. My deepest apologies if you think this is racist. Perhaps you ought to look in your own heart for the racism. Read more. Criticize less. You are ignorant and know nothing of the world.
James, you aren’t used to people challenging you, are you? Most of your responses to my quite civil questions are gibberish. Please get off your computer and go learn to philosophize in person. It will do you well. You have stated a string of propositions and nothing that ties your propositions together.
James, you aren’t used to people challenging you, are you? Most of your responses to my quite civil questions are gibberish. Please get off your computer and go learn to philosophize in person. It will do you well.
Ilovephilosophy truly has fallen and is an internet backwater for idiots, the Dacia of the Information Age. So much fun, so long ago… Please have fun pretending to be smart. You are all a bunch of navel gazing fuck monkeys and none of you deserve the letters you look upon. So long, fare well, and consider those of us who are well versed in philosophy look down upon ye all. Upon this, The Great Name of Hermes the Thrice Great, one of the oldest amongst thee, bids thee all a grand fuck off. As you are all a bunch of dumbfucks, piddling around in a BBS that needs to be updated, but none of you have the skills to update it. Have fun, ye old fucking losers. Moderators? Who moderates? what piddling bullshit. All piddling bullshit. This whole site is piddling bullshit, by people with no philosophical skills. Have fun navel gazing, boys.
