From: MrTomMorgan@aol.com
Date: Sat Jan 31 2004 - 23:36:28 GMT
Before I answer, just to introduce myself, I'm Tom. Hi all.
Matt,
Pirsig himself talks of language determinism in LILA, and specifically
mentions Edward Saphir. The Saphir-Whorf theory (Lee Whorf also contributed towards
it), is that our thoughts are determined by our language. It would then stand
to reason that:
a) Without language we would have little to no thought activity
b) The language we learn determines our thought to some extent (this is shown
in the examples Pirsig uses of Eskimos/Snow, Hopis/Time)
c) The language we employ to explain ourselves affects how well we are
received.
On the flip side of this we have the theory that our language is determined
by our thoughts, which is a more common-sense theory.
Linguists nowadays believe there to be a mix between the two (sometimes
called weak determinism). It could just be that sometimes we have thoughts for
which we have no lexical representation, or words for which we have no thoughts.
That could lead us to the state of pre-thought you describe.
The idea that we 'think' in anything other than words is a good arguement
against language determinism, people think in pictures, and you suggest pure
unadulterated concepts. Is this 'pre-thought' an innate sense of Quality? Well, I
would say that that's highly subjective, but...
Tom
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 31 2004 - 23:37:51 GMT