I wrote: 'Then how does the writer know when the words he's mulling do not articulate his thought? Obviously the thought already has to be there.'
Derek responds: "But in what form could the idea even *exist* if you deny it language - or for the painter colour etc, or for the composer, sounds. "The same goes for everyday thoughts: how could we - including the thinker - know what the thought is if is not expressed in any way. What could give it form?" If you'd tried to respond to the six challenges in #2 on wordless thoughts, it's pretty to think you wouldn't be putting this question. First off, I'd hope you see that what "WE know" about another person's thought has no impact on whether or not he has a thought. I'm certain you've had thoughts in your day that the other guy had no idea you were harboring. Second -- I said rock-climbers, chefs, chess-players, even tennis-players are thinking all the time, just not with words. I could expand endlessly that list of people who usually are thinking about things without putting their thoughts into words. You continually confuse thought and the expression of the thought. Your question about "forms" is a red herring. What is the form of mental images? Mental images. What is the form of feelings? Feelings. When you finally acknowledge that thoughts always exist before the words are found to express them, you'll perhaps agree that the answer to the question "What is the form of thoughts?" is. . .thoughts. I wrote: "And how do you accommodate the fact that some writers do NOT struggle? A thought comes to them, and they immediately "jot it down". As I'm writing the short paragraphs you're now reading, these thoughts are coming to me in effect instantly. I then begin the time-consuming task of "putting them into words". Derek responds: "Very simply. The ideas we are expressing are relatively straightforward. So the words come easily." Yes they do -- AFTER I have the thought. It's disheartening to see that Derek left out the last sentence in that quote above (I reinserted it) plus the words immediately following that quote. Here they are: " Look at my two-line paragraph above beginning, "Then how doesb&" I knew instantly what I wanted to "say". Finding the word to say it took time. I mulled the words 'mulling', and 'articulate'. "Will they convey what's on my mind?" I asked myself. The "what's on my mind" was already there." I wrote: "How conceivably could he be searching for words unless he already knew what he wanted them to say?" Derek responds: "Again, how could he *have* the thought if you deny him in form to have it in? It would have to be a kind of 'contentless' thought. Shades of Zen." It's interesting to watch great athletes play, to see how they "know" exactly what they want to do trick a defender, how instantly their "thinking" changes when another defender comes into range. The idea that they have to articulate their plan in words or it's a contentless thought is ludicrous. Derek ends: "I know you have made more points but as i said I don't like to do long posts." It's interesting that in the thousands of words contributed to this thread by me, Mando, and Brady you have not seen a single point you agreed with, and nothing you acknowledge you hadn't thought of. I close with a word of praise for that under-appreciated item, the thesaurus. I almost never reach for it to find a synonym. Their greatest value for me is their gathering in juxtaposition words for related but not identical notions. Often I have a specific nuance of notion I want to articulate. I can think of words that come close but aren't right. So I go to the thesaurus and wade around in allied entries. Ah! There it is -- that expresses this thought I have! ************** Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
