[MF] A thirty-thousand page menu with no food?

[Matt Kundert]

Steve,

Steve said:
This is probably a multi-pathed triple-helix 'thought' on my behalf, but 
'thought', if it's accredited as requiring a language to 'operate', would 
suggest to me that animals lets say, must also need a language in order to 
think.  And if they need a language to define objectivity, then do they not 
ALSO require vocal language in order to define the objects on which they 
think of?

Matt:
I should've been more careful.  When I said that I don't know what 
non-linguistic thought is, I should've said I don't know what non-linguistic 
human thought is.  After the creation of language, our thought is 
linguistic.  Or, if we ascribe the simple behaviors of the "lower" animals 
as "thought," then we should say that certain complex behaviors of humans is 
linguistic.  Typically we say that other animals are acting on instinct and 
that we, by contrast, think, but the difference is only one of degree of 
complexity.  Humans' behavioral complexity increased exponentially with the 
creation of language.  And behaving in the way we typically call "conscious 
thought" means linguistic use.

Matt

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/