Is Language an Expression of Self

When we speak to another we speak of ourselves we express unconsciously the self. It is in the very essence of language we find the reality of being. It is the divine being of human which can only unravel their selves through intellectual communication. Does this communication have a meaning behind it than merely to translate the self but indeed it is a translation of self and anyone who can consciously engage in the human language is translating reality to another human being. If this is true is language based on the fact to translate being to existence and thus are understanding of things are based upon the reality which our language is able to be coherent of. If this is so is language essentially the object's state of mind and the projection of its perception upon itself. Language is essentially communication with the self and knowledge that one exist and the thing one perceives exist. Language is the essence of knowing reality.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010]

[edit on 1-5-2010 by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010]

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


if language mean reality knowledge from self expression then communication is never true, which is impossible because anything is first true

what one say is first a reaction to another living force or denial, so we cant resume that being objective knowledge justification wether from subjective perspective of the move means or the objective result that language could reach in that situation

that is why i believe taht language is true when free, so the base of truth would be real, and that would explain how different tools use can mean a language between livings too, and that would realize the sense of self being a free positive present one from recognizing else ones also existing

Exactly. It is semiotic "movement" at continental philosophy. Also many stems of phenomenology (after Husserl) are rooted at understanding of language role.
Just change bit confusing statement: "... the object's state of mind ..." with plane term "subject" - subject is "thinking object" for others (even for itself) and its "state of mind" is implied by coinage of the term - every mind (subject) is at some state in other words.

Edit to add: This is quite complicated area and my poor English will lead to many misunderstandings. Half of my bookshelf is filled by relevant literature on this theme and I studied it under good teachers. Still ... concept, stated by OP, is for bachelor degree paper. It will probably not be productive to discuss it here.

Edit to add2: There is missing even shadow of inter-subjectivity concept and without it we can't move forward. Levinas may give us few hints but it is not sufficient IMHO. We should move to bio-politics after Levinas also. It is all interconnected.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by zeddissad]

[edit on 1-5-2010 by zeddissad]

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

if language mean reality knowledge from self expression then communication is never true, which is impossible because anything is first true

what one say is first a reaction to another living force or denial, so we cant resume that being objective knowledge justification wether from subjective perspective of the move means or the objective result that language could reach in that situation

that is why i believe taht language is true when free, so the base of truth would be real, and that would explain how different tools use can mean a language between livings too, and that would realize the sense of self being a free positive present one from recognizing else ones also existing

Essentially though language cannot be communicated it is not as we humans define it to be free but rather we are agents of language each individually representing the realities that allow us to communicate with abstract ideas.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


language is not forcing you to speak, free will element is always present and how far can you see yourself from it is to you to decide

but logically self is of else recognition, you shouldnt reject that fact of truth
wether that else is objective existing fact or that else is subjective else reality, self move can be anywhere from the recognition of what is not it that make it easy to define its terms anywhere according to his wills from the place
but also what i meant is that self expression is rarely a word, because language is to say else while self expressions are itself from else

language mean the else definite object reality, but in free sense by recognizing the concept of else being alive to allow that speech means live

Really? This can't be happening again... I'm going to try my best to stay away from this.

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

language is not forcing you to speak, free will element is always present and how far can you see yourself from it is to you to decide

but logically self is of else recognition, you shouldnt reject that fact of truth
wether that else is objective existing fact or that else is subjective else reality, self move can be anywhere from the recognition of what is not it that make it easy to define its terms anywhere according to his wills from the place
but also what i meant is that self expression is rarely a word, because language is to say else while self expressions are itself from else

language mean the else definite object reality, but in free sense by recognizing the concept of else being alive to allow that speech means live

What I am saying is that language does not essentially force us to speak as we define speaking but that it defines our speech in the self as a state of mind which is irrefutable as part of our existence and our minds relation with the objet perceived.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


you are not language to say language outside of yourself being the source of yourself reaction, you must say language from where you are a living seeing it while dealing postive with to see it objectively

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

language is not forcing you to speak, free will element is always present and how far can you see yourself from it is to you to decide

but logically self is of else recognition, you shouldnt reject that fact of truth
wether that else is objective existing fact or that else is subjective else reality, self move can be anywhere from the recognition of what is not it that make it easy to define its terms anywhere according to his wills from the place
but also what i meant is that self expression is rarely a word, because language is to say else while self expressions are itself from else

language mean the else definite object reality, but in free sense by recognizing the concept of else being alive to allow that speech means live

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,]
................./......................................................,:`^`..]
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........[.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,],.~";/....]
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.`~,......"~.,....................`.....]............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........].>-._...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_..........._,-%.......`
...................................,

Ultimate confusion.

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

you are not language to say language outside of yourself being the source of yourself reaction, you must say language from where you are a living seeing it while dealing postive with to see it objectively

Essentially what I am saying is language is not language at all it only expresses itself as that when one if free to object to the subject or the state of mind. Language only is as we define it to be as long as we are able to abstract reality. We must exist physically to explain language. Though the I of language does not exist it is merely an illusion

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


i see what you want to say how our existence is of god and not us, but i disagree, language is happening as a reaction to force as else you mean to convince from waht it fake being positive to free your life

but it doesnt matter what language mean self defense expression, there is always objective truth as source reference and reality definition

language as free living mean recognition of else livings positively so it means free absolute communications life

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

i see what you want to say how our existence is of god and not us, but i disagree, language is happening as a reaction to force as else you mean to convince from waht it fake being positive to free your life

but it doesnt matter what language mean self defense expression, there is always objective truth as source reference and reality definition

language as free living mean recognition of else livings positively so it means free absolute communications life

Yeah but you see the human language is subjective and objective it cannot be vanguished but in so far that we as humans remain subjective to our language there must be an objection to it and thus the term objective reality has been termed because objection itself as a means of reason is necessary to come to realistic conclusions. Our conscious understanding of the subject allows us to put into our subject the description of a thing observed this is language. But language goes beyond the description of the thing and is not merely just an objective thought related to it but is indeed an expression of the subjective truth that unites the relation of the object and subject. An inexpressable language which gives power and force to the human language as a transcendental ideal in whose language the self can be related to the object.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


I agree completely. Well said. Language is our biggest barrier, until we overcome the language or change its complexity, it remains as our boundary, if you had to define it.

reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010


exactly but imagine that relation subject subject as free life through language as object, it is possible too when you are truly free then it is all you objective source almost so communication among humans can be freedom life reality that would be very interesting present

you seem to focus on knowing the truth which is understandable because we are in negative existence, but if you are true then you would understand that sense of freedom base to truth

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

I agree completely. Well said. Language is our biggest barrier, until we overcome the language or change its complexity, it remains as our boundary, if you had to define it.

Thank heaven for this translation it is exactly what I am saying Language is a barrier of man's own inability to unite the object with the subjective nature of man. Merely it is to say we object to our own subjectivity but we fail to realize the subjective nature of our objective reality. Language essentially is not related to the object but is purely a state of mind and being which can only be expressed by itself and through the destruction of objectivity as we know and the transformation surrounding the objectivity of material being to become an expression that is not defined purely by itself but remains itself by being at one with the undefiniability of its nature.

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

I agree completely. Well said. Language is our biggest barrier, until we overcome the language or change its complexity, it remains as our boundary, if you had to define it.

Thank heaven for this translation it is exactly what I am saying Language is a barrier of man's own inability to unite the object with the subjective nature of man. Merely it is to say we object to our own subjectivity but we fail to realize the subjective nature of our objective reality. Language essentially is not related to the object but is purely a state of mind and being which can only be expressed by itself and through the destruction of objectivity as we know and the transformation surrounding the objectivity of material being to become an expression that is not defined purely by itself but remains itself by being at one with the undefiniability of its nature.

Originally posted by imans
reply to post by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010

 

exactly but imagine that relation subject subject as free life through language as object, it is possible too when you are truly free then it is all you objective source almost so communication among humans can be freedom life reality that would be very interesting present

you seem to focus on knowing the truth which is understandable because we are in negative existence, but if you are true then you would understand that sense of freedom base to truth

Yes very true if we know ourselves as being true than the objective understanding we possess must indeed allow us to know ourselves. Because our relationship with the object allows us to identify ourselves as intelligent beings. But what I am saying is the freedom to know we are ourselves through the definition of the object or is the language we possess as humans merely something which is upon the description of this freedom and object which we describe it as. Rather it is our nature to be able to exist as beings whose semiotic dispositions is subject to the object we perceive. Language is merely the translation of subjective limits within our human reason as it pertains to the relation of reality and the object. Essentially are language is run by certain principles but we have to be able to translate these subjects and principles to actually be able to know subjectively. Although Language is essentially something that does not exist in this realm but rather as an pre ordained symbolic language that does not relate the freedom to relate merely as an objection of the mind to the thing but rather as an expression of both as one but subject to the human understanding of it

[edit on 1-5-2010 by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010]