Language is stupid.

The fact that we as humans are not always able to fully express thoughts means that language is limited. The fact that it is limited makes it unintelligent. If language is unintelligent, then it is as the title implies, stupid. Discuss.

What would you propose as an alternative?

Oh no it's like Narc 2.0.

What would you propose as an alternative?

I'm not saying language is useless, just stupid.I weigh more on the side of revision than destruction altogether.

Oh no it's like Narc 2.0.

Oh no, someone is attempting to start an original thread rather than some rehashed one on morality or god, they must be mimicking someone!

So it's meant to be a totally serious thread?

So it's meant to be a totally serious thread?

It really is, please treat it as such.

Well you need to elaborate on the massive leap from limited to unintelligent.

Well you need to elaborate on the massive leap from limited to unintelligent.

Fair enough, my word choice was perhaps a little misleading. It's limited and thus is not fully functional, which in my opinion makes it unintelligent. If language were intelligent it would not be so extremely limited. The definition of intelligence in this case only applies within the context I've laid out, for lack of a better word. Apologies if I am being unclear in my arguments, it's been a while since I've made serious posts.

1984 provided an ingenious solution to this problem.

I don't really have anything to say except that I don't think limited equates to unintelligent. I don't see any connection between the two words; it's like saying apple equates to chair.

1984 provided an ingenious solution to this problem.

Roundy is plusgoodthinker duckspeaker. Newspeak for the doubleplusunlose

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 08, 2008, 12:02:52 PM

1984 provided an ingenious solution to this problem.

Roundy is plusgoodthinker duckspeaker. Newspeak for the doubleplusunlose

Fullwise doubleplusgood! 

Quote from: Chris Spaghetti on June 08, 2008, 12:21:30 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 08, 2008, 12:02:52 PM

1984 provided an ingenious solution to this problem.

Roundy is plusgoodthinker duckspeaker. Newspeak for the doubleplusunlose

Fullwise doubleplusgood! 

I thinkwise bellyfeel!

OP, perhaps you should learn esperanto. It's supposed to be more logical and easy to use than most romance/germanic languages.

In all honesty, I have often wondered about the revision of language, and what "perfect language" (if such a thing is even possible) might be.

At one point, I came to the conclusion that the perfect language (if the purpose of language is to express reality) would be entirely verbless, since as a philosophical determinist, I am, metaphysically speaking, convinced that "action" is illusory since it implies human agency. In purely philosophical terms, an action is indistinguishable from there being a new state of nouns. (Yes, I know I have to use the verb "to be" to even convey that concept, but in this particular Sprachspiel it would be implicit and would not require explicit use).

With basic operators like conditionals and some rudimentary tenses, you could express anything in the most "real" way possible.


Anyway, if you're after a fun natural language that is fairly logical (face it, Esperanto sucks because nobody speaks it), you should go for Turkish. I'm currently learning it and having great fun. It's completely phonetic, there are hardly any irregular verbs (and all infinitives end in a verb-denoting suffix), there's no noun genders (there aren't even gender pronouns such as he, she and it). It's the most reasoned and sensible natural language I've tried to learn.

Intelligence is limited.

Therefore, intelligence is stupid.

/philosophy

Anyway, if you're after a fun natural language that is fairly logical (face it, Esperanto sucks because nobody speaks it), you should go for Turkish. I'm currently learning it and having great fun. It's completely phonetic, there are hardly any irregular verbs (and all infinitives end in a verb-denoting suffix), there's no noun genders (there aren't even gender pronouns such as he, she and it). It's the most reasoned and sensible natural language I've tried to learn.

Hmm sounds kinda familiar to the good points about Finnish then, very versatile language. Probably the best one for swearing in as well

Math is a language and theoretically can fully express thoughts.

The fact that we as humans are not always able to fully express thoughts means that language is limited. The fact that it is limited makes it unintelligent. If language is unintelligent, then it is as the title implies, stupid. Discuss.

Language isn't limited. You're just too lazy to write the necessary amount of text to convey a thought.

Quote from: Guessed on June 08, 2008, 10:45:30 AM

The fact that we as humans are not always able to fully express thoughts means that language is limited. The fact that it is limited makes it unintelligent. If language is unintelligent, then it is as the title implies, stupid. Discuss.

Language isn't limited. You're just too lazy to write the necessary amount of text to convey a thought.

Exactly.

Upon giving it further thought I've concluded that language is unlimited and the human brain is in fact limited instead, making humans unintelligent hence stupid.

I think calling language limited therefore stupid, is like saying a wrench that doesn't unscrew a bolt for you is stupid.

I think calling language limited therefore stupid, is like saying a wrench that doesn't unscrew a bolt for you is stupid.

no, it's lazy. fucking sponger

Quote from: Benocrates on June 09, 2008, 03:55:23 AM

I think calling language limited therefore stupid, is like saying a wrench that doesn't unscrew a bolt for you is stupid.

no, it's lazy. fucking sponger

semantics

What about a wench that doesn't unscrew a bolt for you? Now that is lazy.

The fact that we as humans are not always able to fully express thoughts means that language is limited. The fact that it is limited makes it unintelligent. If language is unintelligent, then it is as the title implies, stupid. Discuss.

Stop talking.

Upon giving it further thought I've concluded that language is unlimited and the human brain is in fact limited instead, making humans unintelligent hence stupid.

Fair enough, as I said, my original post is perhaps a little misleading in the way that it's written. But, given that language is a human construct and you've just established humans are stupid, how could they create a language any better than themselves? I suppose I've just answered my own thread...   

Quote from: Kasroa Is Gone on June 09, 2008, 12:26:02 AM

Upon giving it further thought I've concluded that language is unlimited and the human brain is in fact limited instead, making humans unintelligent hence stupid.

Fair enough, as I said, my original post is perhaps a little misleading in the way that it's written. But, given that language is a human construct and you've just established humans are stupid, how could they create a language any better than themselves? I suppose I've just answered my own thread...   

indeed...

Quote from: Kasroa Is Gone on June 09, 2008, 12:26:02 AM

Upon giving it further thought I've concluded that language is unlimited and the human brain is in fact limited instead, making humans unintelligent hence stupid.

Fair enough, as I said, my original post is perhaps a little misleading in the way that it's written. But, given that language is a human construct and you've just established humans are stupid, how could they create a language any better than themselves? I suppose I've just answered my own thread...   

Why couldn't they?