[MD] indefensible yet enlightening

[Ian Glendinning]

Hi Mary,

Getting old means often being lost for words, especially names for
people and things (even concepts), and fortunately I find is doesn't
seem to inhibit thinking, or even in some contexts dialogue.

Still not sure that all symbolic thinking has to be in pictures, but
there are all kinds of mental tokens. Often a substitute word, (by
association) means it is even possible to have a conversation (with
someone you know well), not just lost for words, but positively using
the wrong words. "You know what I mean ?" Stopping to find the right
word slows down the conversation, so better to press on with the wrong
word.

Ian

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Mary <marysonthego at gmail.com> wrote:
> Have you ever been at a loss for words?  Try to catch yourself at this sometime.  I've tried and the best analogy I can come up with is "pictures".  I definitely notice having thoughts that are prior to language, though.  In fact, sometimes concepts occur to me and I don't even bother to convert them to English words.  I know what I mean, and this gives me more mental time to move on to the next thought. Sometimes converting thoughts to words seems a waste of mental "cpu cycles" especially during problem solving when I need to evaluate and accept or reject potential solutions in a hurry.
>
> Mary
>
> On Behalf Of craigerb at comcast.net
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 9:24 PM
>>
>> [Horse, quoting Craig]
>>
>> "No one thinks in pictures, because the picture would have to be
>> interpretted & that could not be done by another picture.
>> (see Wittgenstein)"
>>
>> [Horse]
>> > I'm not sure why you think that no-one thinks in pictures.
>>
>> Strange.  You quote my (& Wittgenstein's) argument, then ask for an
>> argument.
>> Perhaps an example will help:
>> (I'll assume we're talking about "mental" pictures here.)
>> Suppose you hear scratching on the other side of a door & a picture of
>> a cat
>> comes to mind.  Could this picture be what's meant by "thinking there
>> is a cat
>> on the other side of the door"?
>> No, because this same picture could come to mind when thinking "I wish
>> a cat
>> would chase away t he squirrel scratching on the other side of the
>> door".
>> The pict ure cannot play the needed role of thinking, " because the
>> picture
>> would have to be interpretted & that could not be done by another
>> picture".
>> You could think " there is a cat on the other side of the door" even if
>> a picture
>> of a car came to mind.
>> Craig
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>