Ouagadougou Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 Hello everyone! I recently watched a tragic "60 Minutes Australia" video below about a young girl who (for a long period of time) was raised by dogs. As a result of living in isolation, without language and human contact, the long-term effects were devastating to her cognitive, psychological, emotional, physical, and overall development.https://youtu.be/nv3ocntSSUU Needless to say, after watching this video, I spent a considerable amount of time reading about human development, nature vs. nurture, along with how humans are the only animals truly capable of acquiring language. For example: "But no animal has yet acquired the linguistic capability that children have already in their third year of life." "Human intelligence, even in its most basic forms, is expressed in our language, and is also partly dependent on our linguistic capacity."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ Our unique ability to acquire language then made me think about "the Light of Christ," or our inner light; and I had the following questions: - Is it possible that this inner light is our unique cerebral ability to acquire language, which allows us to determine right from wrong? - Or is one of the manifestations of this inner light in humans our unique ability to acquire language? And as Elder Packer stated below: "Regardless of whether this inner light, this knowledge of right and wrong, is called the Light of Christ, moral sense, or conscience, it can direct us to moderate our actions—unless, that is, we subdue it or silence it."https://www.lds.org/liahona/2005/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng "Ethics involves normative concepts, of what is right, just or fair to do, and of their contraries. And since animals do not understand such concepts, they are incapable of anything like human moral behaviour or related feelings."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ As this distressing "60 Minutes" video illustrated, without language, interaction, human contact, and stimulation to the parts of our brain that acquire and develop language, humans are unable to achieve the same levels of cognitive awareness; thus, becoming like other animals, IMO. Finally, I think our unique ability to acquire language is inspired, divine, and something that didn't just occur by chance, as a result of some random mutation, natural selection, or via evolution. IMO, language is the catalyst by which we can make choices, attempt to understand God, and progress as humans--in a way--it's our "inner light," or the mechanism we use to manifest it to others. "Human beings, as Aristotle observed and Descartes reiterated, are animals with a language. And language here is also logos, that is, logic or rationality. And experience teaches us that these are absent from the rest of the animal kingdom." 2
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 2 hours ago, Ouagadougou said: Hello everyone! I recently watched a tragic "60 Minutes Australia" video below about a young girl who (for a long period of time) was raised by dogs. As a result of living in isolation, without language and human contact, the long-term effects were devastating to her cognitive, psychological, emotional, physical, and overall development.https://youtu.be/nv3ocntSSUU Needless to say, after watching this video, I spent a considerable amount of time reading about human development, nature vs. nurture, along with how humans are the only animals truly capable of acquiring language. For example: "But no animal has yet acquired the linguistic capability that children have already in their third year of life." "Human intelligence, even in its most basic forms, is expressed in our language, and is also partly dependent on our linguistic capacity."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ Our unique ability to acquire language then made me think about "the Light of Christ," or our inner light; and I had the following questions: - Is it possible that this inner light is our unique cerebral ability to acquire language, which allows us to determine right from wrong? - Or is one of the manifestations of this inner light in humans our unique ability to acquire language? And as Elder Packer stated below: "Regardless of whether this inner light, this knowledge of right and wrong, is called the Light of Christ, moral sense, or conscience, it can direct us to moderate our actions—unless, that is, we subdue it or silence it."https://www.lds.org/liahona/2005/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng "Ethics involves normative concepts, of what is right, just or fair to do, and of their contraries. And since animals do not understand such concepts, they are incapable of anything like human moral behaviour or related feelings."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ As this distressing "60 Minutes" video illustrated, without language, interaction, human contact, and stimulation to the parts of our brain that acquire and develop language, humans are unable to achieve the same levels of cognitive awareness; thus, becoming like other animals, IMO. Finally, I think our unique ability to acquire language is inspired, divine, and something that didn't just occur by chance, as a result of some random mutation, natural selection, or via evolution. IMO, language is the catalyst by which we can make choices, attempt to understand God, and progress as humans--in a way--it's our "inner light," or the mechanism we use to manifest it to others. "Human beings, as Aristotle observed and Descartes reiterated, are animals with a language. And language here is also logos, that is, logic or rationality. And experience teaches us that these are absent from the rest of the animal kingdom." Bingo. Gospel of John Chap 1 Quote 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. DC 93 Quote 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be. 30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. No intelligence, no language, no "existence" as we know it. No word for "existence" even!! You think whales talk about "existence"? Or theology? 2
Maidservant Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 Many wonderful things can come from language, or so it seems. But it's interesting that you bring it up this way, and I will ponder it. Because to me, our language and our concepts (tied together to the degree that they are functionally the same at least in real time) are what have functioned as that which separates us from God and reality (according to me). This child without language may not be able to be ethical, BUT, this child also could not sin. The child remained innocent and unaccountable. I personally don't think the human race has arrived at truth and ethics yet. So any example we might give about our ethics is going to fail as something we still have to grow out of. (Also--ethics, by the way, is not a scriptural term by the way. The Savior and the gospel do not teach morality and ethics. That is nowhere in the scriptures. The scriptures teach law, as well as teaching against law . . . so . . . mucho interestanto; the scriptures teach unclean and clean.) Interestingly, I just read in 3 Nephi where Jesus prayed and words could not describe the prayer. And also the things the children were saying were too great to be described by words. Of course, that is beyond the light of Christ anyway, well into greater territory. In my understanding, sin is separation from God (Family). All of the things we normally describe as 'sins' are not sin, but are the symptoms of sin, are the harvest of that sin--the harvest of being alone. That we leave the union of the family of God, or may have been cast out by others who wanted to effect the 'sin' or 'separation' in their own misunderstanding. To repent is not as much to CHANGE (our symptoms) as it is to BE RECONCILED with our brother WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING TO CHANGE, because we recognize we are all noobs anyhow. And/because we can't really CHANGE on our own. This return to the FOLD gives us the capacity to release our SYMPTOMS that came from the separation. We enter the space of charity, the re-union, the becoming one. Everything else about us--including our language and description--falls away. We don't talk about hugs--we simply hug. So to me, language and concepts and what we think is 'truth' is that division or a big driver of it anyway. But I will ponder some more on it. It's interesting.
The Nehor Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 Note to self: Having dogs raise your children is a bad idea. Look into voles. Or wolves.....Mowgli turned out all right. 4
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Maidservant said: Many wonderful things can come from language, or so it seems. But it's interesting that you bring it up this way, and I will ponder it. Because to me, our language and our concepts (tied together to the degree that they are functionally the same at least in real time) are what have functioned as that which separates us from God and reality (according to me). This child without language may not be able to be ethical, BUT, this child also could not sin. The child remained innocent and unaccountable. I personally don't think the human race has arrived at truth and ethics yet. So any example we might give about our ethics is going to fail as something we still have to grow out of. (Also--ethics, by the way, is not a scriptural term by the way. The Savior and the gospel do not teach morality and ethics. That is nowhere in the scriptures. The scriptures teach law, as well as teaching against law . . . so . . . mucho interestanto; the scriptures teach unclean and clean.) Interestingly, I just read in 3 Nephi where Jesus prayed and words could not describe the prayer. And also the things the children were saying were too great to be described by words. Of course, that is beyond the light of Christ anyway, well into greater territory. In my understanding, sin is separation from God (Family). All of the things we normally describe as 'sins' are not sin, but are the symptoms of sin, are the harvest of that sin--the harvest of being alone. That we leave the union of the family of God, or may have been cast out by others who wanted to effect the 'sin' or 'separation' in their own misunderstanding. To repent is not as much to CHANGE (our symptoms) as it is to BE RECONCILED with our brother WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING TO CHANGE, because we recognize we are all noobs anyhow. And/because we can't really CHANGE on our own. This return to the FOLD gives us the capacity to release our SYMPTOMS that came from the separation. We enter the space of charity, the re-union, the becoming one. Everything else about us--including our language and description--falls away. We don't talk about hugs--we simply hug. So to me, language and concepts and what we think is 'truth' is that division or a big driver of it anyway. But I will ponder some more on it. It's interesting. Misunderstanding- I agree with you I am talking about the difference between social reality- ie: reality as spoken about- vs direct personal experience All human interaction is based on "language" including wordless "body language", signing, touching in some contexts etc. Direct experience is what is "really real". Truth is a property of sentences and sentences are not "real"- they are symbols of the richness of experience. Direct experience- unspoken or "described" is real reality. Even scripture is social reality- the Gospel is the MESSAGE - the WORD. LOGOS. Best we can do in language but not "Face to Face, " still imperfect, still from human to human "insofar as is translated correctly" So NOW through a glass darkly while speaking language but THEN face to face- true "reality" Maybe more later- social -language life named "work" is calling..... James and John, let us go down...... Edited November 14, 2018 by mfbukowski 1
pogi Posted November 14, 2018 Posted November 14, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, Ouagadougou said: Hello everyone! I recently watched a tragic "60 Minutes Australia" video below about a young girl who (for a long period of time) was raised by dogs. As a result of living in isolation, without language and human contact, the long-term effects were devastating to her cognitive, psychological, emotional, physical, and overall development.https://youtu.be/nv3ocntSSUU Needless to say, after watching this video, I spent a considerable amount of time reading about human development, nature vs. nurture, along with how humans are the only animals truly capable of acquiring language. For example: "But no animal has yet acquired the linguistic capability that children have already in their third year of life." "Human intelligence, even in its most basic forms, is expressed in our language, and is also partly dependent on our linguistic capacity."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ Our unique ability to acquire language then made me think about "the Light of Christ," or our inner light; and I had the following questions: - Is it possible that this inner light is our unique cerebral ability to acquire language, which allows us to determine right from wrong? - Or is one of the manifestations of this inner light in humans our unique ability to acquire language? And as Elder Packer stated below: "Regardless of whether this inner light, this knowledge of right and wrong, is called the Light of Christ, moral sense, or conscience, it can direct us to moderate our actions—unless, that is, we subdue it or silence it."https://www.lds.org/liahona/2005/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng "Ethics involves normative concepts, of what is right, just or fair to do, and of their contraries. And since animals do not understand such concepts, they are incapable of anything like human moral behaviour or related feelings."https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/can-animals-acquire-language/ As this distressing "60 Minutes" video illustrated, without language, interaction, human contact, and stimulation to the parts of our brain that acquire and develop language, humans are unable to achieve the same levels of cognitive awareness; thus, becoming like other animals, IMO. Finally, I think our unique ability to acquire language is inspired, divine, and something that didn't just occur by chance, as a result of some random mutation, natural selection, or via evolution. IMO, language is the catalyst by which we can make choices, attempt to understand God, and progress as humans--in a way--it's our "inner light," or the mechanism we use to manifest it to others. "Human beings, as Aristotle observed and Descartes reiterated, are animals with a language. And language here is also logos, that is, logic or rationality. And experience teaches us that these are absent from the rest of the animal kingdom." I view language as symbols/signs. I don't think humans are necessarily unique in our use of symbols/signs to communicate ideas. Language are seeds to experience, and as such it can produce fruit of experience and enlightenment. Some language is more advanced and enlightened then others, but I think all of the animal kingdom is on a continuum of linguistic ability in different forms. Some scientists may disagree, but I think they are limiting themselves in their definition of "language". Other scientists agree because they use a different definition "language". There is no universal agreement as to what language really is. It is a problem of, well, language. I know that I certainly communicate with my dog and vice versa. We understand each other through verbal and nonverbal language. I would argue that all animal species cooperate through use of language in one form or another. Ants, for example, have complex social systems that rely on language/communication for survival. Humans are not unique in our endowment of the light of Christ. There is nowhere that the light of Christ is not. I view the light of Christ as the medium of pure communication. All intelligence is possible only through the light of Christ (D&C 88 and 93) - even animal intelligence. I believe that all intelligence communicates with other intelligence through various means of language. Pure language is received by us via the ineffable light of Christ, it passes through filters of culture, cognitive ability, etc., it is translated through those filters and comes out in spoken language. Spoken language is therefore only a sign of a sign. Pure language to me is just pure intelligence. Edited November 14, 2018 by pogi 1
Ouagadougou Posted November 15, 2018 Author Posted November 15, 2018 6 hours ago, pogi said: I view language as symbols/signs. I don't think humans are necessarily unique in our use of symbols/signs to communicate ideas. Language are seeds to experience, and as such it can produce fruit of experience and enlightenment. Some language is more advanced and enlightened then others, but I think all of the animal kingdom is on a continuum of linguistic ability in different forms. Some scientists may disagree, but I think they are limiting themselves in their definition of "language". Other scientists agree because they use a different definition "language". There is no universal agreement as to what language really is. It is a problem of, well, language. I know that I certainly communicate with my dog and vice versa. We understand each other through verbal and nonverbal language. I would argue that all animal species cooperate through use of language in one form or another. Ants, for example, have complex social systems that rely on language/communication for survival. Humans are not unique in our endowment of the light of Christ. There is nowhere that the light of Christ is not. I view the light of Christ as the medium of pure communication. All intelligence is possible only through the light of Christ (D&C 88 and 93) - even animal intelligence. I believe that all intelligence communicates with other intelligence through various means of language. Pure language is received by us via the ineffable light of Christ, it passes through filters of culture, cognitive ability, etc., it is translated through those filters and comes out in spoken language. Spoken language is therefore only a sign of a sign. Pure language to me is just pure intelligence. I agree that other animals can communicate, but I don't think they have language or "pure language," as you pointed out. Maybe language is coupled with us being self aware, along with being able to distinguish right from wrong.
Ouagadougou Posted November 15, 2018 Author Posted November 15, 2018 7 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Misunderstanding- I agree with you I am talking about the difference between social reality- ie: reality as spoken about- vs direct personal experience All human interaction is based on "language" including wordless "body language", signing, touching in some contexts etc. Direct experience is what is "really real". Truth is a property of sentences and sentences are not "real"- they are symbols of the richness of experience. Direct experience- unspoken or "described" is real reality. Even scripture is social reality- the Gospel is the MESSAGE - the WORD. LOGOS. Best we can do in language but not "Face to Face, " still imperfect, still from human to human "insofar as is translated correctly" So NOW through a glass darkly while speaking language but THEN face to face- true "reality" Maybe more later- social -language life named "work" is calling..... James and John, let us go down...... What I also find interesting is that there is still no evolutionary explanation for human language. In others words, the belief that divine interventation created language is still just as plausible as an amazing genetic mutation, IMO. Additionally, language is clearly what gives humans domain over this world, along with our ability to understand/perceive our own existence and reality; it's the glue that holds our experiences and intellect together. https://evolutionnews.org/2018/08/update-still-no-evolutionary-explanation-of-human-language/
mfbukowski Posted November 15, 2018 Posted November 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: What I also find interesting is that there is still no evolutionary explanation for human language. In others words, the belief that divine interventation created language is still just as plausible as an amazing genetic mutation, IMO. Additionally, language is clearly what gives humans domain over this world, along with our ability to understand/perceive our own existence and reality; it's the glue that holds our experiences and intellect together. https://evolutionnews.org/2018/08/update-still-no-evolutionary-explanation-of-human-language/ Yes and that is a very LDS way of seeing it- as I quoted above John 1 says that everything was created by the "Word"- Logos and then we have: DC 93 Quote 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be. 30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. Some will argue with that word "plausible" but I might put it as another paradigm which is no more or less falsifiable as any other one Where there is no evidence, there is no evidence.
Storm Rider Posted November 15, 2018 Posted November 15, 2018 I always understood the Light of Christ to be an understanding of what is right and what is wrong in a moral sense. If you want to call it that small voice in the back of our heads. It is beyond our consciousness - it is not being aware, but the first step in connecting to God.
Recommended Posts