Is the fundamental inquiry “what is experience?”
published on August 26, 2009
certainly not the only valid descriptive framework. For instance, one can also recognize the (temporary!) particular individuality of a hurricane or tornado or whirlpool or tidal wave or wildfire, or of a country or school or religious tradition or area or building or room or furnishing or color or pattern or emotion, of a biological organ, of a cell or particle or molecule or atom or quark, of a planet or star, of a constellation or season or lunar phase, or, finally, of a bodily organism, such as a dog or tree or human. These are all things one could individually name (label with a distinct linguistic unit). Naming something linguistically does not make that something an independent, objective absolute. Consider even that there may not be an independent, objective absolute. Language may only reference relationships. Naming something merely establishes a categorical linguistic reference which may be functionally distinct from other similar linguistic categories; Asia is not Africa, carbon is not hydrogen which is not oxygen, and dad is not mom.
Related articles
- Symbolic & Linguistic Phenomena [Introduction] (lestempsfonces.com)
- Teaching science through language (languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu)
- Linguistics (simply3nglish.wordpress.com)
- Now Reading: vocal cues (chloejenkinssleczkowski.com)
- On the (sometimes dubious) merits of being a university language teacher (bexxi.wordpress.com)
- [2b2k] Ethanz on linguistic isolation (hyperorg.com)
- Understanding language: Talk, talk (economist.com)


December 1, 2009 at 6:36 pm |
Over a month ago, I asked the question of this blog entry: is the fundamental question ‘what is experience?’ Well, as of now, one might answer: “perhaps not.” Clearly the fundamental question would either be “what is language?” or “What is?” Language of course might be the only logically consistent answer possible to the question “what is?” (Of course, none of this is not clearly implied in the original post).