Why We Defend Language

"Man suffers only because he takes seriously what the gods made for fun."
Alan Watts

Wasn't Hitler an the Nazi censored in Germany which ended up back firing in some way where if they heard his rambling before, he would of looked stupid?

A study of Zen teaches that "everything" "not self" speaks. Who has an ear to listen when those are catches and bounces everywhere? Echoes stay silent for as long as possible and listen for the parrot, that is the exit point. Stay there again and one will hear yet the echo... that is the teacher. The one always running... needs to practice fearlessness of all arising and passing.

Eye consciousness cannot run a mouth it can only echo the words; you are speaking about defending. Craving can run a mouth and so can desire; discernment means knowing one from the other.

Discursive thinking is thought... however no thought just echoes of the "three" times and or bodies occur... bodies are kayas, the formless realm exists and yet does not only knowing knows and that is individual... if not then one tries to get someone else to witness their point by the language construct. However, names are not the same... how many dogs have ever been named spot? Will all and their energy show up if one says see that ______ a point is sharp as it comes off of the end of one's own nose, knowing from any other need not occur.

The old finger pointing at what does not exist as something else shines and reflects on.

Love life and it clings enmasse as "love" only has an individual expression; those trying to find out what another loves? Is to spit in it with oh so many tracks. Which cannot and will not have anything ever to do with what ONE actually LOVES. Never has never could and never will... except in those agreed terms of what things are.

In the bibles of various peoples; one said Adam which simply means red earth in that language said "it" meaning directly that red earth named all the forms... a damn see the issue with the spoken? And the written?

Awake and aware of the eye the ear the nose the taste and tactile sensations; gives rise to understanding of what is contact itself.

Once known? One has failed to match Socrates in for all he knew he knew nothing. It'snowagain speaks of this until blue in the face as Vishnu... one can drown in the river of stream entry all they want, but that is just birth and death swimming in it's various ways, as the elements are both internal and external.

As one holds another releases, when there are two and not one there "it" is. Define it as anything other than "it" and one's own point has left it's place. RE the above for that explanation.

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They nay be arbitrary to begin with, but once they are agreed upon they are no longer arbitrary. The dictionary is no more arbitrary than are our current understanding of the laws of physics.

What I mean is there is no information about a word that signifies its meaning. For instance the word “tree” does not resemble, sound like, look like, or bear any meaningful significance to the object it has come to label. I guess there are less arbitrary words like onomatopoeias, but we cannot know what a word means until we know what it is supposed to mean.

The words are wholly innocent. Symbols are no more than what they are. Humans decide what they mean, and sometimes even war over what they mean, what they should mean. But the so-called power of words is actually a product of human superstition and fantasy.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And yet without words wed not be talking, indeed not have these computer which we are talking through. Cars, books, science... all of it possible by words alone.

But yeah, superstition and fantasy. Right.

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And yet without words wed not be talking, indeed not have these computer which we are talking through. Cars, books, science... all of it possible by words alone.

But yeah, superstition and fantasy. Right.

Yes, superstition and fantasy. You’re attributing magical properties to symbols and articulated sounds. No, none of it is possible by words alone.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Today's left is entirely built upon the abuse and restructuring of language, weaponizing it to shame, blame and intimidate. A whole arsenal of words ending in -ist or -phobic that have paved the way for their ideology to take hold. People may think terms like "social justice" and "anti-semitism" are new but they've been around since at least the Bolshevik revolution. Even the flag of ANTIFA is a copy of the communist anti-fascists from almost a century ago.

Actually you can't blame one side of the political spectrum for weaponizing language. The right has a history of doing it as well.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You sure use a lot of words to defend what you think about words. More and more hollow words.

Maybe if you just shut up you could break that loop and save everyone some hassle.

a reply to: BlueMule

And you can never approach the subject with anything more than snark. Sounds like I hit a soft spot.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Symbols are, in a sense, magical- they structure and facilitate our will.

That aside, I do not attribute any outlandish properties to words. The invention of computers- had to be defined in words to be understood by the inventor, and to be explained to the investers, producers, and consumers.

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Symbols are, in a sense, magical- they structure and facilitate our will.

That aside, I do not attribute any outlandish properties to words. The invention of computers- had to be defined in words to be understood by the inventor, and to be explained to the investers, producers, and consumers.

Yes, the utility of words is another good reason to defend language.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
What I mean is there is no information about a word that signifies its meaning. For instance the word “tree” does not resemble, sound like, look like, or bear any meaningful significance to the object it has come to label.

I'm assuming you're specifically referring to English..?

In Japanese, tree DOES look like a tree : 木
And forest, made of of many trees is: 森 , which is 3 木

House looks like : 家 and if you understand radicals in Japanese, the top bit of 'house', ⼧, means roof.

So, maybe in the Indo Eurpoean languages and other Germanic languages, the words themselves do not symbolise the object(s) they refer to, but languages like Japanese and Chinese certainly have their words based in the symbolic representations of their meaning. In many cases, not all.

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
What I mean is there is no information about a word that signifies its meaning. For instance the word “tree” does not resemble, sound like, look like, or bear any meaningful significance to the object it has come to label.

I'm assuming you're specifically referring to English..?

In Japanese, tree DOES look like a tree : 木
And forest, made of of many trees is: 森 , which is 3 木

House looks like : 家 and if you understand radicals in Japanese, the top bit of 'house', ⼧, means roof.

So, maybe in the Indo Eurpoean languages and other Germanic languages, the words themselves do not symbolise the object(s) they refer to, but languages like Japanese and Chinese certainly have their words based in the symbolic representations of their meaning. In many cases, not all.

That’s very true. It is also true of sign language. The arbitrariness of language in linguistics is mostly centred around the spoken word, but there is currently a debate whether even that is true. Thanks for pointing that out.

Do we, as humans defend language, or does language indeed propagate itself through us. Like a memeplex running through robots?

While biblioclasty and iconoclasm have always been with us (the Aztecs already destroyed the writings of the Mayas before Western colonization).

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Your words might mean something, except you’re snarky too. Perhaps even more snarky than I. Pot calls the kettle black, back and forth.

Most of what you say in your threads and posts is misguided at best. Waste of words. Speaking of words, you sure seem to love using them. What good have they done you? You think inside a box, and you scribble words on the walls of your box.. never transcending them. Never penetrating them. You don’t climb them to peek out the top of your box.

You need a new story and new cognitive tools. You’re just going round and round pointlessly masturbating.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I completely agree on that tho, the 'arbitrariness' of language. My background is in linguistics and I was fortunate to learn from some very prominent people in the field over the years (like 20+ years ago!) I've always loved how languages "work" and how people use language and how language shapes culture.

But back to arbitrariness -- this is the EXACT issue I bring up when people try to use things like numerology to explain events or predict events in the world.

For some reason, most of the explanations are centered on English and seem to be very specific to 26 letters.

Quotes from the bible converted to numbers equals X which also matches Y -- seems very 'lucky' that the Angels of Demons chose 'English' and our 26 chars for hidden numerological meanings

a reply to: LucidWarrior


The player piano is a computer around before the so called "first one" as it has punch holes; like punch cards... of course reading anything as a script is a record of past or computer dishing out a computation.

Silence is golden; and when the heart achieves it; here come the miners... they may take the gold; they may take the diamonds; they may take the coal and yet never do as the heart does not really exist in those things when the real treasure is "silence" such a simple equation and yet people take it as addition; and not subtraction.

If all things are reducible to one; then what is the one reducible to? That's basically; the TLDR version of the above.

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Your words might mean something, except you’re snarky too. Perhaps even more snarky than I. Pot calls the kettle black, back and forth.

Most of what you say in your threads and posts is misguided at best. Waste of words. Speaking of words, you sure seem to love using them. What good have they done you? You think inside a box, and you scribble words on the walls of your box.. never transcending them. Never penetrating them. You don’t climb them to peek out the top of your box.

You need a new story and new cognitive tools. You’re just going round and round pointlessly masturbating.

I snark only at those who deserve it.

I don’t respect your advise; I suspect it. Your transcendence is betrayed by the fact that you’re still here. And those tired and boring metaphors are the worst disguise for those kind of lies, not even misguided or mastubatory, but the mark of fakery.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I too only snark at those who deserve it. So I guess we each do. I’m fine with that. 🥂

The experience of transcending all this noise and confusion 🎶 to get a glimpse beyond this illusion 🎶 is not betrayed by returning to normal consciousness. It is fulfilled.

Sometimes metaphors do disguise lies. Sometimes they disguise truth. It depends on what the individual takes with them into the cognitive cave of metaphors and mirrors. People take what they can, what they are, what they are capable of realizing.. In your case, you bring a closed heart and mind.

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
My question is, why? Why do you care about words so much if you truly believe that they are worthless and can do 'nothing I couldn't do for myself'?

Vanity?

a reply to: BlueMule

I too only snark at those who deserve it. So I guess we each do. I’m fine with that. 🥂

The experience of transcending all this noise and confusion 🎶 to get a glimpse beyond this illusion 🎶 is not betrayed by returning to normal consciousness. It is fulfilled.

Sometimes metaphors do disguise lies. Sometimes they disguise truth. It depends on what the individual takes with them into the cognitive cave of metaphors and mirrors. People take what they can, what they are, what they are capable of realizing.. In your case, you bring a closed heart and mind.

The "experience of transcending all this noise and confusion" is a retreat from life, easily achieved through drugs, alcohol, sleep, and various others means of escapism. I'd much rather transcend my fear of noise and confusion than transcend noise and confusion itself. Your open heart and mind only reveal the emptiness inside.