Re: Greetings all & Re: The Very Very First Sentence

This is a very difficult question and I have'nt quite
solved it yet (the word 'yet' being a little
presomptuous if you consider that hundreds of diplomed
philosophs have written thousands of unintelligible
tomes on the subject with little result). My own
theory sounds something like that :

1/ There is a Brain, be it human, ET, electronic or
whatever, and there is a World, whatever too.

2/ Conscience is connection from the Brain to the
World (plugging the Brain onto the World). (NB: the
Brain itself belongs to the World, but it knows
nothing about that yet; the World could even be
limited to the Brain itself).

3/ The Brain is pre-hardwired. Even if it never comes
to Conscience, it still possesses tools, just like
your computer possesses an OS even if it will never
use it (because you let the whole thing fall down on
the ground before you ever had the opportunity of
using it, for ex; and supposing that the machine
wasn't tested by the manufacturer before delivery).

4/ When the Brain is switched on, it connects to the
World and receives a signal, meaning that 'there is
something', 'it works'. If no signal is received, the
Brain remains in pre-conscient limbo, it's just the
same as if it was dead, or rather non-born. There is
no remarkable difference between it and a dead ass.

5/ When the Brain receives this first signal, it
has'nt yet the ability of analysing it, and deciding
that 'haha, this was a visual, or auditive, or
electric, or telepathic, or other signal, so I shall
handle it this or another way', because nothing is
organized yet in the Brain, and it knows nothing about
the World nor itself. The only thing it can conceive
at this very early stage is 'There is something',
'Etwas ist'. The signal sets the whole system on to
work. The rest of it will come later.

6/ If the signal keeps perfectly unique and regular,
the Brain won't go any further in discovering the
Mysteries of the Universe. But if the signal is
irregular, or multiple, than the Brain has the ability
(because this was hardwired in its machinery) to
detect that 'haha, there is Difference'. This is
possible because it has a hardwired routine somewhere,
called Compare (at least in our Language).

7/ From these initials concepts of Existence and
Difference, and from the interactions between the
Brain and the World (be it single or two-directional),
with the help of the initial hardwired routines,
proceed Experience, Knowledge, Intelligence, Mental
Organized Representation and whatever.

So the Language follows more or less the steps of the
Brain in its analysing of the World. It may be a
little late sometimes, and if the Mental Organized
Representation is somehow messy, it will be messy too,
of course (this is why our natlangs are usually rather
illogical, and vary rather much from each other ; the
Brain is not a perfect system). And so the hardwired
routines are not able to make a Mental Organized
Representation out of themselves : they only give the
necessary support for it. Without World Experience
(and without physical tools like Seeing, Hearing, and
all other Perception Systems), nothing will never
happen, and there will be no Knowledge and no
Language.

So that was it. Go in peace, brothers, and meditate
about it.

--- Matt Trinsic <trinsic@...> wrote:
>
> Re: The Very Very First Sentence
>
> > Can we imagine a world lacking the concept of
> > differenciation ? That would be even more
> primitive
> > than chaos. Chaos is lack of any organization.
> Without
> > differenciation, you couldn't even say that
> something
> > exists, because this simple affirmation would
> suppose
> > that it is possible that something doesn't exist,
> and
> > that's already differenciation. Differenciation
> looks
> > to me the most primitive concept at all. Without
> > differenciation, no word for yes or no, for true
> or
> > false, no word, no language at all. The very first
> > phrase one logically can conceive is probably:
> "There
> > is something" (but this English form is
> fallacious,
> > because it includes the word 'there', supposing
> > localization; better in French: Il y a quelque
> chose,
> > or even better in Russian: Est' chto-to (the word
> > 'chose' also sounding too concrete), or German:
> Etwas
> > ist.
> >
> > =====
> > Philippe Caquant
>
> Ver interesting Philippe. In that case, the first
> sentance in slathred
> ekryd  could have been an interjection, "siz". It
> bascially means
> something that has been differentiated from
> something else. However, for
> a theory of something even more basic that
> differenciation, how about
> sensation? Without the ability to sense, differences
> could not be
> noticed even if they did exist.
>
> ~Trinsic

=====
Philippe Caquant

"Le langage est source de malentendus."
(Antoine de Saint-Exupery)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html