URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Questions & Debates
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 1670--------------------------------------------------
       Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: SirGalahad
       Date: October 21, 2020, 1:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'm a linguist, and have always been interested in languages and
       the diversity to be found among human language. However, an
       acquaintance argues that it would be preferable if everyone
       spoke the same language, rather than merely reinforcing national
       languages above regional languages as proposed in the
       Communication article on the main site. I instinctively object
       to this idea because the world would be far more boring if the
       entire world spoke one language, but I can't really object to
       the idea that if everyone shared a language in common, it'd be
       possible to communicate with far more people. The person I'm
       debating with has even taken it a step further by claiming that
       not only should everyone agree on a common language, but that
       everyone should speak the same language on a native level, since
       knowing 2 or more languages at the same time, and trying to
       maintain proficiency in all of them, is less efficient. Any
       thoughts on this, and whether or not nations should in fact
       preserve their own unique languages at all?
       #Post#: 1684--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: October 22, 2020, 12:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       We are not preservationists in principle. We do not believe the
       mere fact that something already exists is a reason for it to be
       preserved. The burden of justification should always be on those
       wishing to preserve, not on those wishing to simplify, since
       preservation requires continual effort whereas simplification
       requires a once-only effort.
       "the world would be far more boring if the entire world spoke
       one language"
       Argument from boredom could potentially be used to justify any
       form and any degree of complexification, which is why we reject
       this argument. (Most of the macro-problems caused by Western
       civilization can be traced to Westerners considering the
       existing arrangement too boring and therefore becoming motivated
       to add new things.)
       I would say that the world would be far more simple if everyone
       spoke one language, and simplification is what we value.
       However, the hard part is deciding (and achieving agreement on!)
       which language is to be the one language everyone would speak.
       Even among people who value simplification, there is bound to be
       divergence of opinion over which one language to keep, which is
       likely to take a long time to resolve. Therefore I am OK with
       leaving this disagreement for later, at least until the people
       who value simplification have collectively defeated the people
       who value complexification.
       "whether or not nations should in fact preserve their own unique
       languages at all?"
       The only valid argument for preservation of languages is fear
       that we might discard better languages in favour of worse ones,
       and hence end up unable to retrieve languages that we later
       realize we would have preferred to keep (had we known better).
       Therefore I am generally not in a hurry to start actively
       phasing out languages, given the current circumstances.
       From the perspective of Original Nobility, however, we were all
       born not knowing any language. That is what we should ultimately
       be trying to get back to as an ideal. Learning multiple
       languages can be good, but only if in so doing we further
       convince ourselves that no language can ever be satisfactory for
       expressing our true feelings. But the moment you start to become
       attached to the languages themselves, instead of remembering
       that they are all nothing but extremely bad ways to approximate
       what we feel, you are already on the slippery slope.
       #Post#: 1689--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: guest5
       Date: October 22, 2020, 12:18 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Interestingly, this article was published yesterday. Note in the
       very opening sentence there is no mention of feelings or
       emotions. I suppose emotions are just information then?:
       Cognitive elements of language have existed for 40 million years
       --- Quote ---
       > Language is one of the most powerful tools available to
       humankind, as it enables us to share information, culture, views
       and technology. "Research into language evolution is thus
       crucial if we want to understand what it means to be human,"
       says Stuart Watson, postdoctoral researcher at the Department of
       Comparative Language Science of the University of Zurich. Until
       now, however, little research has been conducted about how this
       unique communication system came to be.
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201021180740.htm
       #Post#: 1692--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: October 22, 2020, 3:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       One reason why I like retro arcade games is that playing them is
       one of the easiest ways for my mind to revert to non-language
       thinking, because language thinking is too slow (by the time you
       describe to yourself in words what is happening on the screen
       and what you need to do next, you are already dead). You can
       also learn how to play a game well just from watching a better
       player play, without the better player ever needing to explain
       anything in words.
       Similarly, I believe it should be possible to learn skills like
       subsistence farming etc. from observation and imitation alone,
       without language required. This is worth trying at some point in
       future after we have defeated all our enemies.
       The conclusion should be that everything that requires language
       to learn is not something we should want to learn in the first
       place.
       #Post#: 1694--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: SirGalahad
       Date: October 22, 2020, 5:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       @90sRetroFan That makes sense. But if our end goal is ultimate
       simplicity, then why only extend it to language? The forums and
       the main site seem to advocate each nation using their own
       culturally specific clothing and architecture. Wouldn't it be
       simpler if the entire Aryan world were governed under one
       nation, with said nation possessing one culture, one form of
       architecture, one style of clothing, etc? The issue with that
       though, is that it would be kind of confusing to claim to be
       nationalistic, yet advocate the eventual dissolution of nations
       and have Aryans governed under one roof instead. Because while I
       agree with the sentiment that people who side against the
       colonialists are more American, it feels sort of contradictory
       in my mind to emphasize Americanness if we're ultimately
       discarding national cultures as well. I'm just wondering what
       your end goal is, because I wanna gain a better understanding of
       the sort of role that nations play under National Socialism, and
       Aryanism as a whole. Do you see them as having a shelf life as
       it pertains to our ideology? Is emphasizing culturally and
       regionally specific architecture/clothing/art/aesthetics, and
       advocating for national self-determination and autarky only a
       means to an end (as protest against colonialism and Western
       influence), with the total unification I just described being
       the end goal?
       #Post#: 1695--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: guest5
       Date: October 22, 2020, 5:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I know your response is directed at 90SRF, but I just wanted to
       interject.
       I always viewed tribalism as a step backward and the
       nation-state as a step forward. This is not to imply that a
       'step-backward' is always a bad thing either, but in the case of
       tribalism it is because if we all practiced tribalism there
       would be never ending war. I don't believe the nation-state is
       the end goal, just a step in the right direction toward
       something even better.
  HTML https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/3429965-Arthur-Keith-Quote-Human-nature-as-manifested-in-tribalism-and.jpg
       Just reading what others have had to say about tribalism versus
       nationalism on the internet leads me to believe most people have
       no clue what they are talking about in regards to both:
  HTML https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/2744149-Cornel-West-Quote-I-loathe-nationalism-It-is-a-form-of-tribalism.jpg
       You are either a tribalist or a nationalist, a person cannot be
       both at the same time. This should be so obvious it shouldn't
       need to be pointed out....
       #Post#: 1697--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: SirGalahad
       Date: October 22, 2020, 6:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       @NuminousSun I agree entirely. It drives me up the wall when
       people confuse nationalism for jingoism or chauvinism. I hear
       "Nationalism is patriotism taken too far" or "Nationalists are
       those who side with their government right or wrong" so often.
       And it certainly doesn't help that as time progresses, the
       "official" definitions for nationalism become increasingly more
       negative. Perhaps that is an expected response, considering how
       much racists have soiled the concept by coopting it. But I hope
       that we're eventually able to clear things up
       #Post#: 1713--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: October 23, 2020, 12:52 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "why only extend it to language?"
       We do not.
       "The forums and the main site seem to advocate each nation using
       their own culturally specific clothing and architecture."
       Only for now.
       "Wouldn't it be simpler if the entire Aryan world were governed
       under one nation, with said nation possessing one culture, one
       form of architecture, one style of clothing, etc?"
       Eventually, yes, but if we try to do this too early, we will run
       into the same disagreement as I anticipated we would have with
       language: which one style do we keep? This is why I am willing
       to put off this issue so long as we are still busy trying to
       defeat our common enemies.
       "it would be kind of confusing to claim to be nationalistic, yet
       advocate the eventual dissolution of nations and have Aryans
       governed under one roof instead."
       If we are lost inside a maze with 10 people in area A and 10
       people in another area B distant from A, the most efficient way
       to get everyone to the exit is to direct the 10 people in A to
       gather somewhere in A, and the 10 people in B to gather
       somewhere in B, and only then move the gathered group in A and
       the gathered group in B towards the exit.
       Gathering the people into local groups is nationalism. Moving
       the gathered groups towards the exit is Aryanism. The two groups
       may meet each other along the way, or they may not meet until
       reaching the exit. The important thing is that each group
       receives the correct directions towards the exit relative to
       their respective (different) starting points. If, however, we
       try to give the two groups identical directions for the sheer
       sake of giving them identical directions, at least one group
       will not reach the exit. The only correct time to start giving
       the two groups identical directions is if they happen to have
       met along the way. But we must also avoid forcing them to meet
       along the way for the sheer sake of meeting along the way, as
       doing so might involve taking them somewhere cut off from the
       exit.
       "while I agree with the sentiment that people who side against
       the colonialists are more American, it feels sort of
       contradictory in my mind to emphasize Americanness if we're
       ultimately discarding national cultures as well."
       Imagine area A above is the New World. To be anti-colonialist
       without being pro-American would be like saying: "Look at the
       people over in area B! Just do exactly what they are doing!" Do
       you think that will work? (For the sake of visualization,
       imagine B is in pitch darkness, so the people in B have to start
       a fire for illumination before they can even get a sense of
       direction. A, on the other hand, is not only already
       well-illuminated, but also constructed entirely from flammable
       materials.....)
       "Is emphasizing culturally and regionally specific
       architecture/clothing/art/aesthetics, and advocating for
       national self-determination and autarky only a means to an end
       (as protest against colonialism and Western influence)"
       Yes.
       "with the total unification I just described being the end
       goal?"
       Reaching the exit is the end goal. If everyone reaches the exit,
       there will be unification as a side-effect, whether this
       unification occurs before the exit is reached or at the point
       when the exit is reached. But unification at a point other than
       the exit is not necessarily success, especially not if it occurs
       at a point from which there is no route to the exit.
       #Post#: 1714--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: SirGalahad
       Date: October 23, 2020, 3:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks, that clears things up a lot. I've been wrestling with
       the two topics in this thread for a while now
       #Post#: 2596--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Merits (Or Lack Thereof?) of Preserving Linguistic Diversity
   DIR By: guest27
       Date: December 1, 2020, 1:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 90sRetroFan link ---
       >
       > One reason why I like retro arcade games is that playing them
       is one of the easiest ways for my mind to revert to non-language
       thinking, because language thinking is too slow (by the time you
       describe to yourself in words what is happening on the screen
       and what you need to do next, you are already dead). You can
       also learn how to play a game well just from watching a better
       player play, without the better player ever needing to explain
       anything in words.
       >
       > Similarly, I believe it should be possible to learn skills
       like subsistence farming etc. from observation and imitation
       alone, without language required. This is worth trying at some
       point in future after we have defeated all our enemies.
       >
       > The conclusion should be that everything that requires
       language to learn is not something we should want to learn in
       the first place.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I feel this so hard. Words are painfully slow and clunky. Maybe
       I should blame this for the reason why I often have to read the
       same basic as **** sentence several times in order to grasp it,
       because I'm just not fond of pacing my thoughts and decrypting
       things.
       I wonder if we should transition to communicating moreso in
       images. The human animal is predominantly visual; and this, in
       contrast to cetaceans who are so specialized in aural
       communication, they're likely able to replicate sonar messages
       to project an auditory "image" of the object they wish to
       describe.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1