Is language at the core of civilisation

Hypothesis: Language, the ability to speak it, learn it, and to express it silently to oneself is at the core of all civilisation.

There is a correlation between vocabulary and human development, that is undeniable, but is there causality?

Let me introduce an example. How developed is the vocabulary of a crack-gang member in the slums of a United States city?

His ability to express himself is limited to the vocabulary of his environment, which is in this case very limited.

Let's compare this individual with a member here at Oh the Humanities. A member here at this forum will in most cases have a vocabulary substantially larger than his Crack-gang counterpart, he will most certainly be able to express his emotions better than his counterpart, but has he created a better life for himself? Is he self-determined?

[fallinghouse]

Sounds like the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, which has, for one reason or another, fallen out of favour in academic circles.

Originally Posted by Special. K

Hypothesis: Language, the ability to speak it, learn it, and to express it silently to oneself is at the core of all civilisation.

Go to New Guinea next time you have a chance. Are the natives without speech?

That is why I suggest science fiction for grammar school kids. Especially sci-fi with REAL SCIENCE. It introduces concepts and vocabulary of science in an entertaining manner. They can make science more interesting than the science books actually. You can find stuff there that most people won't encounter until college.

Sounds like the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, which has, for one reason or another, fallen out of favour in academic circles.

I think pseudo-intellectuals need to create controversy and vary the popularity of ideas to keep the laymen confused. If good accurate information became widely known then how could the intellectual elite maintain the pretense of being an intellectual elite.

DT

I believe language is not at the core, but the core of civiliZation.

The ability to communicate ideals, and record them, that are unknown or new to another enable people to grow and evolve.

Without language this would be impossible and we would all be limited to what we alone are capable of without preexisting knowledge and teamwork.
Which would result in no progression and thus no civilization.

Originally Posted by Sanity0verRated

civiliZation.

Actually it can be spelled either way, in my neck of the woods it happens to be with an s.

[Nerd Fangs]

Originally Posted by dal7timgar

I think pseudo-intellectuals need to create controversy and vary the popularity of ideas to keep the laymen confused. If good accurate information became widely known then how could the intellectual elite maintain the pretense of being an intellectual elite.

DT

Those intellectual elite who remain in cutting edge research will continue to remain the intellectual elite, as the ordinary layman can only learn what has already been researched and cannot conduct his own research.

To suggest that there is some kind of conspiracy within the scientific domain to limit lay knowledge is simply absurd.

[Vanhalla]

There was an experiment done awhile back, where a chimpanzee was in a cage with a banana hanging outside of his grasp. If a stick was placed in his viewpoint of the banana, he would use this stick to get the banana. BUT if the stick was behind the ape outside of his viewpoint, he wouldn't know to use this stick and reach the banana.
Thats pretty darn interesting.
This intelligent creature does not get the banana unless he sees it in the same frame as the stick.
This seems to mean that because the ape does not have a name for these things, these concepts cannot be used unless viewed together.
We have the name stick, and the name banana, therefor we can hold both of these things in our minds, even though both are not seen simultaneously.
Because of its lack of understanding symbols, this extraordinarily intelligent animal is limited in such a ridiculous way.

Language is important and frames like any understanding we can have. It's just a set of symbols, though. It's one of the most efficient/adaptive set of symbols we have to understand things. So while I wouldn't say it's at the core (I say the human capability for symbol creation/interpretation is.) It is, however, one of the best skill in our symbolic repertoire, and is able to convey things like logic or to grasp many concepts in a way that cannot be handled by other symbols. And it also allows for some level of specificity ("verbatim") that would be unprecedented. It's definitely central in the society of today, though. One way to tell is to imagine us suddenly losing language. Society would grind to a halt until we manage to fashion a new society via different means communication.

edit:

Originally Posted by dal7timgar

That is why I suggest science fiction for grammar school kids. Especially sci-fi with REAL SCIENCE. It introduces concepts and vocabulary of science in an entertaining manner. They can make science more interesting than the science books actually. You can find stuff there that most people won't encounter until college.



I think pseudo-intellectuals need to create controversy and vary the popularity of ideas to keep the laymen confused. If good accurate information became widely known then how could the intellectual elite maintain the pretense of being an intellectual elite.

DT

Also, I like this idea.

Originally Posted by dal7timgar

I think pseudo-intellectuals

I have asked before and I shall ask again DT, where does one draw the line between a pseudo-intellectual and his fully fledged counterpart?