what is first thought or language?
how is the thought of the deaf and dumb?
about Pete´s I need to
about Pete´s I need to
that poem made made me think of something else.....
what is first thought or language?
how is the thought of the deaf and dumb?
what is first thought or language?
how is the thought of the deaf and dumb?
Based on Helen Keller, I'd have to say thought comes first, as she had many she was desperate to express, and finally did. Here, 'deaf and dumb' is an archaic phrase/term, as it tends to suggest lack of intelligence that's simply not merited. I wish there were some way to be inside of the mind of a person who has never been able to hear, as well as that of the person who's never been able to see. I would love to be able to answer your question, as I've often wondered myself.
Hi Sandra ~
The 'politically correct' terms have changed over time, with professional and laymen's interest in 'getting it right.' However, "hard of hearing"/"hearing impaired" [not totally deaf] and "deaf and mute" [profoundly deaf]. With both, they have different communicating styles than the norm, but are still able to do so.
"Deaf and dumb" was once fully accepted, but it had to be done with, due to its implications [dumb = "not able to speak; silent; stupid"]. In a recent training I was in, the following paragraph was in a handout [of an article] the trainer gave us. It goes beyond my 'correction' with you, but still reenforces the point:
"Words are powerful. Old, inaccurate, and inappropriate descriptors perpetuate negative stereotypes and attitudinal barriers. When we describe people by their labels or medical diagnoses, we devalue and disrespect them as individuals. What is the purpose of a disability label? It's a sociopolitical passport for services! But we mistakenly use labels to determine how/where people with disabilities will be educated, what type of job they will/won't have, where/how they'll live and more. Worse, labels are frequently used to define a person's potential and value! In the process, we crush people's hopes and dreams and relegate them to the margins of society."
The article has some very interesting aspects and makes some very crucial points regarding "disabilities." The quote that comes just beneath the article's title is by Mark Twain ~ "The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." I recall that same quote being used here in the Forum a long time ago, regarding something else [probably in the Member's Poetry section].
If you're interested in reading any more from this article, let me know [PM] and I'll be happy to extract and type some more for you. It's very informative and covers people with all different kinds of disabilities.
Thanks for asking for the 'proper' terminology, Sandra
.
~ Lizzy
The 'politically correct' terms have changed over time, with professional and laymen's interest in 'getting it right.' However, "hard of hearing"/"hearing impaired" [not totally deaf] and "deaf and mute" [profoundly deaf]. With both, they have different communicating styles than the norm, but are still able to do so.
"Deaf and dumb" was once fully accepted, but it had to be done with, due to its implications [dumb = "not able to speak; silent; stupid"]. In a recent training I was in, the following paragraph was in a handout [of an article] the trainer gave us. It goes beyond my 'correction' with you, but still reenforces the point:
"Words are powerful. Old, inaccurate, and inappropriate descriptors perpetuate negative stereotypes and attitudinal barriers. When we describe people by their labels or medical diagnoses, we devalue and disrespect them as individuals. What is the purpose of a disability label? It's a sociopolitical passport for services! But we mistakenly use labels to determine how/where people with disabilities will be educated, what type of job they will/won't have, where/how they'll live and more. Worse, labels are frequently used to define a person's potential and value! In the process, we crush people's hopes and dreams and relegate them to the margins of society."
The article has some very interesting aspects and makes some very crucial points regarding "disabilities." The quote that comes just beneath the article's title is by Mark Twain ~ "The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." I recall that same quote being used here in the Forum a long time ago, regarding something else [probably in the Member's Poetry section].
If you're interested in reading any more from this article, let me know [PM] and I'll be happy to extract and type some more for you. It's very informative and covers people with all different kinds of disabilities.
Thanks for asking for the 'proper' terminology, Sandra
.~ Lizzy
we had a lodger/house guest once who was deaf. she had just graduated from the local university with an honours degree in Literature. Special therapy had enabled her to speak reasonabley well even though she could not hear what she said. Years ago deaf people were wrongly considered to be mute as well, but only because they were unable to copy what they heard/didn't hear around them. Claire lived a pretty normal life and had some deaf friends as well as plenty of hearing friends.
Exactly, Margaret ~ thanks for making that additional distinction. Profoundly deaf does not even necessarily mean 'mute' ~ if one thinks of how Marlee Matlin sounds, you can imagine the same with others. Some people feel 'uncomfortable' trying to communicate with someone because, in general, the sound is not what we're used to. Some are difficult to understand, whereas others are remarkably easy. And how they sound [i.e. Claire] has nothing to do with how they think or process/retain information ~ or anything else about them.
Sandra,
This is how it seems to me, though I may well be wrong.
Using thought to talk about thought can get tricky. 
Thoughtful regards, Witty Owl.
I think this is a chicken and egg question. As we think fundamentally with words, phrases, concepts, stories, etc. then thought is inextricably linked with language. So if we think with language how can either come first? They "come together", as in the immortal words of John Lennon.what is first, thought or language?
This is how it seems to me, though I may well be wrong.
Using thought to talk about thought can get tricky. Thoughtful regards, Witty Owl.
Language is the vocalised expression of thought so the thought must have been there first Before we developed language to express things in more detail, our ancesters and members of the animal kingdom communicated through noises, signs, gestures etc. to express less sophisticated thoughts such as hunger, need, anger and so on. Thoughts were there in the form of feelings and emotions long before our brains and vocal chords were able to develop language. That's what I think anyway
Before we developed language to express things in more detail, our ancesters and members of the animal kingdom communicated through noises, signs, gestures etc. to express less sophisticated thoughts such as hunger, need, anger and so on. Thoughts were there in the form of feelings and emotions long before our brains and vocal chords were able to develop language. That's what I think anyway Yes, when I put that message about Pete´s poem the relation between his poem and the one I put was opposite but strong ideas relating an urgent desire....he does not want to forget ......and the other poem says Evocation lasts not life.....then gives a last chance to evocation that we cannot avoid.
I understand your comments about thought and language.....thank you all
I understand your comments about thought and language.....thank you all
Margaret, I understand your view point and for other reasons, consider that you may be correct. For example, there is much evidence(to me) that many of the other primates and higher mammals have thought processes but not language. That is distinct from instinctive processes.
But to further my suspect argument- I do not classify feelings and emotions as thought. Thought is a different realm, that for my understanding is part of the language process. Gestures, signs and grunts/calls/noises are a kind of language in that they are modes of communication.
How do I reconcile the contradiction that I think some animals without language also think? How do I think my way out of that one? 
Regards and thoughts, Witty Owl.
But to further my suspect argument- I do not classify feelings and emotions as thought. Thought is a different realm, that for my understanding is part of the language process. Gestures, signs and grunts/calls/noises are a kind of language in that they are modes of communication.
How do I reconcile the contradiction that I think some animals without language also think?
How do I think my way out of that one? Regards and thoughts, Witty Owl.
Look, witty owl- in de Gospel According to John is says- " In the beginning there was a Word, and the Word was with God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being trough him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not overcome it."
OK< does the Word mean- Idea? I tend to think so, so might be that the beginning of all is de Idea- Thought?
but what do I know, might as well be something else
OK< does the Word mean- Idea? I tend to think so, so might be that the beginning of all is de Idea- Thought?
but what do I know, might as well be something else
bee
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
A hypothetical situation in which a baby is cared for by unseen helpers.
A baby is born. It has an empty mind. It is kept in an environment where there is no human speech at all. The baby is not deaf. It hears birds, bees, crickets, rain, wind, thunder. It sees lightning, rain, creatures. The baby has no words to give the thunder, lightning, birds, bees any name. The baby has no words. The baby grows and sees more and hears more of all around it. But yet, it still never hears a human voice. The baby does not hear words. The baby falls and hurts itself. The pain is another factor which adds to the experience of the baby as it grows. The baby utters a sound as the pain hurts. It has no words but it has vocal chords. The sound is a cry caused by the pain. We know that sound. The first sound a baby makes after birth. That sound is not words. It is a physical reaction brought about by the physical anatomy of the baby. It has vocal chords because mankind has been developing vocal chords for millions of years. But this baby has never heard human vocal chords in the way we have heard vocal chords. The baby has a body which is the accumulated development of thousands of previous generations of its ancestors. But the baby has never heard a human voice, which is what all other babies have heard (unless born deaf of course).
The baby experiences hunger. It is fed with food. The baby experiences cold. It is clothed and kept warm. The baby experiences pain. It is comforted. But it has yet to hear a human voice.
The baby continues to grow. When it is hungry it experiences the sort of withdrawl symptoms that smokers experience when they 'need' a cigarette. The baby has an 'image' in its mind of 'food.' It has seen food. It has tasted food. It has smelled food. It has experienced the pleasure that food brings to the baby. But the baby has no words to use. It has never heard words. It has 'images' and 'cravings' and 'experiences' that it remembers from seeing, tasting, touching, smelling and eating. But it has no words.
It knows when it is hungry, cold, warm, uncomfortable.....
But it has no words. It has never heard a human voice and has no 'experience' of words.
The baby grows and knows what it feels. Hunger, pain, thirst, cold, tired, discomfort, and does not want to experience any of these. It grows and knows warmth, full-tummy, drinks, comfortable rest, and has images of what creates these feelings. It uses its eyes, taste buds, nose, ears, bodily sensory impulses from skin, and it has images of all it has seen and heard and felt stored within its brain. But the baby has no words. The baby has never heard a human voice. The baby has been growing in total isolation from mankind.
When it becomes hungry it remembers what it did to stop being hungry. Similarly, when it feels cold. It takes action to assuage its discomforts. It is aware of its condition and what it needs to do. The baby is nearly into adulthood and has still not heard or seen humans. It cannot create words, but it can recall images.
A picture paints a thousand words. It does not need words. It survives by answering the needs of its body as it grows into adulthood. It cannot string a sentence together to describe how it feels. It has no experience of words. But it does know how to stay warm, dry, fed and watered. It learns and adapts to its surroundings. It imitates the sounds it knows.
If the baby could give itself a name, what would it be? It doesn't know words and names are needed to be made from a word. If it was to be given a name would it be called
tarzan?
A baby is born. It has an empty mind. It is kept in an environment where there is no human speech at all. The baby is not deaf. It hears birds, bees, crickets, rain, wind, thunder. It sees lightning, rain, creatures. The baby has no words to give the thunder, lightning, birds, bees any name. The baby has no words. The baby grows and sees more and hears more of all around it. But yet, it still never hears a human voice. The baby does not hear words. The baby falls and hurts itself. The pain is another factor which adds to the experience of the baby as it grows. The baby utters a sound as the pain hurts. It has no words but it has vocal chords. The sound is a cry caused by the pain. We know that sound. The first sound a baby makes after birth. That sound is not words. It is a physical reaction brought about by the physical anatomy of the baby. It has vocal chords because mankind has been developing vocal chords for millions of years. But this baby has never heard human vocal chords in the way we have heard vocal chords. The baby has a body which is the accumulated development of thousands of previous generations of its ancestors. But the baby has never heard a human voice, which is what all other babies have heard (unless born deaf of course).
The baby experiences hunger. It is fed with food. The baby experiences cold. It is clothed and kept warm. The baby experiences pain. It is comforted. But it has yet to hear a human voice.
The baby continues to grow. When it is hungry it experiences the sort of withdrawl symptoms that smokers experience when they 'need' a cigarette. The baby has an 'image' in its mind of 'food.' It has seen food. It has tasted food. It has smelled food. It has experienced the pleasure that food brings to the baby. But the baby has no words to use. It has never heard words. It has 'images' and 'cravings' and 'experiences' that it remembers from seeing, tasting, touching, smelling and eating. But it has no words.
It knows when it is hungry, cold, warm, uncomfortable.....
But it has no words. It has never heard a human voice and has no 'experience' of words.
The baby grows and knows what it feels. Hunger, pain, thirst, cold, tired, discomfort, and does not want to experience any of these. It grows and knows warmth, full-tummy, drinks, comfortable rest, and has images of what creates these feelings. It uses its eyes, taste buds, nose, ears, bodily sensory impulses from skin, and it has images of all it has seen and heard and felt stored within its brain. But the baby has no words. The baby has never heard a human voice. The baby has been growing in total isolation from mankind.
When it becomes hungry it remembers what it did to stop being hungry. Similarly, when it feels cold. It takes action to assuage its discomforts. It is aware of its condition and what it needs to do. The baby is nearly into adulthood and has still not heard or seen humans. It cannot create words, but it can recall images.
A picture paints a thousand words. It does not need words. It survives by answering the needs of its body as it grows into adulthood. It cannot string a sentence together to describe how it feels. It has no experience of words. But it does know how to stay warm, dry, fed and watered. It learns and adapts to its surroundings. It imitates the sounds it knows.
If the baby could give itself a name, what would it be? It doesn't know words and names are needed to be made from a word. If it was to be given a name would it be called
tarzan?
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.
-
Byron
- Posts: 3171
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
- Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert
The images in the baby's mind are what we might call thoughts. Trying to describe all of this posting with words has been difficult enough, but without the ability to use words, it would have been impossible. Perhaps that is why a certain omnipotence rendered mankind to suffer from an inabilty to speak at a certain tower of Babel. Take our ability to communicate away and we descend into the animal kingdom.
I remember reading about children being found in India and South America who had been brought up by wolfpacks. They were completely wild and behaved just as a wolf would. They barked and howled as a way to communicate. Sounds being the normal way used, to express desires, fear etc. So words are used to supply thoughts with building blocks. Similarly, sounds such as the wolfboys made were used to supply their pack with the building blocks of their communication. Therefore, is it sound that supplies the structure to hang our thoughts on?
I remember reading about children being found in India and South America who had been brought up by wolfpacks. They were completely wild and behaved just as a wolf would. They barked and howled as a way to communicate. Sounds being the normal way used, to express desires, fear etc. So words are used to supply thoughts with building blocks. Similarly, sounds such as the wolfboys made were used to supply their pack with the building blocks of their communication. Therefore, is it sound that supplies the structure to hang our thoughts on?
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.