Ricardo writes notes that I wrote > that depending on one's definitions one
may separate
thought and language. That's true, but some definitions are closer to the
truth than others. Even if we define thinking per se as something that
"occurs within an individual's brain" (a very liberal view, I might add)
such private thinking still requires the use of language. <
What's a different, and more accurate, definition of thinking than the one
I provided? What's a non-liberal definition of thinking? Why was my
(admittedly incomplete) definition of thinking liberal? do we reject all
things liberal?
> Just try thinking without words. Chess too involves language; how can you
play (think) without knowing the rules (words, symbols) of chess?<
This misses the point. Thinking -- including that involved with
chess-playing -- definitely _uses_ words, so that thinking _without_ words
is probably impossible. But that doesn't mean that language is the only
tool that thinking uses, which would make thinking and language well-nigh
identical. In fact, I bet that if one doesn't use language to define the
spatial relationships between the pieces on the chessboard, it makes it
easier to play chess. ("the white King is at Queen Knight's third, there's
a friendly pawn immediately past it, etc., etc.)
In addition to words, our minds use intuition, spacial vision, etc. Just
as, according to Howard Gardner, there are 8 kinds of intelligence, the
mind is multi-dimensional. It can't be reduced to one dimension, such as
language.
> No words can be expressed without thinking; all words carry meaning. It
is just that some people think little when they talk. <
I agree. But there's more going on that simply thinking.
>I agree that ideas which are not put into action have little effect on
history. But this does not mean that you can separate actions from words;
it simply means that some ideas are put into actions whereas others are not. <
I agree with this.
In addition, a clarifying note: the expression of words (on paper or in
speech or electronically) is a kind of action (social practice). There are,
however, some types of action that are more important in terms of their
impact on the historical process than others. My lecturing in the
classroom, for example, is less important than the work being done outside
my office window (at this moment) digging the foundation for a new building.
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://clawww.lmu.edu/fall%201997/ECON/jdevine.html
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
