The importance of human language (Animals)

by David Turell , Friday, June 28, 2024, 19:20 (127 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: But we did spill into new places!...Again, I’d say it is our intelligence that has given us domination, and our language is a tool invented by our intelligence but also enabling us to use, communicate and expand our intelligence to maximum effect.

xeno: So when I mean "spill into new places," I didn't mean geographically. I meant the mental world.

dhw: Ah, OK, but the argument also applies to the artefacts, which were the RESULT of thought and engendered new language, and to the mental world (see below).

xeno: by the time of Ecclesiastes, you have someone who is speaking about their own internal life using introspective words and phrases. There's a co-evolution going on between our use of language and our ability to be conscious.

dhw: There is no question that language developed to cover more and more areas of our existence. Only what has expanded, in my view, is not the “ability” to be conscious but the range of things we are conscious of.

xeno: Jaynes makes the point very well I think, that our ability to be conscious--entirely relies on language--which is good because it means we can *always* increase our ability to be conscious just by virtue of having a deeper vocabulary.

dhw: I sort of agree, but this is too simplistic for me. I will use “awareness” as a synonym of consciousness in order to make my argument clearer. I see the process in phases: 1) awareness/ the “ ability to be conscious” is always present; 2) our awareness of each new experience/invention/ concept spawns new language; the language does not spawn the experience; 3) however, we use the new language to pass on the range of subjects that other humans can then be made aware of. And so language is a tool which enables consciousness to expand the range of what it is aware of – and of course this expansion was massively enhanced by the invention of writing. That’s why you have chosen books to illustrate the whole process. As time goes by, we see a complexification of vocabulary which corresponds to and results from the complexification of the thoughts arising from new experiences, discoveries etc.

xeno: Intelligence is necessary but not sufficient to explain our difference with the rest of the animal world. Our intelligence creates new connections but only on the foundation built by prior words and concepts.

dhw: Only partly agreed. The principle is the same for animals, which use their own language to meet their own needs, but because of our superior intelligence, our needs cover an almost infinitely larger range of subjects than theirs, and so our language is almost infinitely more complex. Each NEW word results from the need to give expression to the thought – it does not create the thought.

xeno: The further back in time, the more concrete and specific the language. Less room for a rich mental consciousness. Less room for an inner space.

dhw: Yes, because as time goes by, the range of experience broadens for lots of different reasons – and language is one of them, because it enables others to build on each new line of thought.

DAVID: Consciousness, defined as I have elsewhere as the ability for introspection, is different in kind between the neolithic age and today. And that consciousness is itself the sole difference us and all the other creatures. You simply cannot have what we have without language--language is what makes consciousness possible.

dhw: I don’t like this definition. Introspection is only one form of consciousness. One of the points you made earlier concerned our arrogance in our treatment of animals and other humans – a refusal to recognize that they too are conscious. Animals are conscious of pain, conscious of the past (through memory), consciously respond to anything that threatens their safety, consciously solve problems, devise strategies, cooperate with or fight against other animals. And I have no doubt that our ancestors were equally conscious of everything that concerned their survival, and perhaps had a range of gestures and grunts to cover all their requirements. Introspection, in my view, is not caused by language, but language arises from the need to express and communicate this particular form of consciousness.

I agree introspection is done by using language now. But it is still 'I am aware that I am aware'. And I would guess Erectus operated that degree without many words.

xeno: (And as I pointed out earlier, even the word "consciousness" didn't exist until John Locke invented it.) This means precisely that we have a greater ability to be conscious than our ancestors.

dhw: ... Do you believe that the Romans were not as conscious as we are, that there was no introspection? Ditto with the ancient Greeks and the ancient Egyptians? How do you know that all the homos of whom we have no written record were never introspective? My point is that language may be used to enhance consciousness by expanding the range of what we are conscious of, but language itself develops from intelligence/consciousness, and can then be used as a tool with which we can help others to expand the range of their awareness - not their ability to be aware.

I’ve run out of time, and will stop here. In any case, I’m sure this is enough to set a few sparks flying!

I agree. Consciousness drives language development.