The Role of Language
Can contemporary discourse presume a community of interest? In order to answer this question, one is forced to first answer the question, can language be used to reveal anything new? If the answer is yes, then how can it do this and how can we employ it to do this for us. Also, one is forced to ask what is it exactly that we are looking for? Once we’ve found it, how can we use it to improve our present condition? Plato and Descartes both believe that language can indeed improve our conditions through it’s revelation, and both give methods to attain new knowledge. Although vastly differing, in that Descartes builds knowledge from the ground up, while Plato works from a distorted view, and seeks to clarify it, their philosophies mean the most, and have the highest practical purpose when they are employed together. By basing a Socratic argument on Descartes’ pre-established truths, one can attain undoubtable new knowledge. This knowledge can, and will improve society. The reason it will do this is explainable by looking at the tendency that man has to correct himself once he knows in certitude that he has been mistaken in his actions. Any enlightened individual who has, in the past, made mistakes due to their own ignorance, would, upon learning the error of their ways, not return into err, but use the knowledge to correct their previous mistake. So it is with society. Once we find out where we are in err, it would be ignorant of us not to correct ourselves. Before we can look at finding knowledge, however, we must first look at how we should properly use language.
Socrates and Plato see language mainly as the mechanism to provide truth and knowledge. In engaging in argument, Socrates is given a definition of a word such as courage, justice or piety. Then, rather than giving his own definition in retort, he offers a situation in which the given definition is incorrect and then challenges his opponents to find something which is common to all courageous, just or pious acts. The commonality in things is the goal that Plato and Socrates are striving for. What makes things, like just acts, the same even though they all differ in some way? What is it that all separate just acts have in common so that they are recognizable as just acts? Knowledge is to know what isn’t evident in the object or action, but to know what it is that makes all objects ...
... middle of paper ...
...ve no one would care to argue this point. Since we are contented with our lot in life and do not care to search for truth but rather have it handed to us for the cost of an education, cable bill and Internet connection per month, are we not the fools who are content while the enlightened few, the philosophers and all those others who think for themselves, remain discontented with our situation. As Plato and Socrates would certainly suggest, language use is essential if we are to have some idea of a means to achieving our goal as humans in society. It is quite evident now that language is indeed a powerful tool and can be used for reasons of knowledge and for reasons of power. It is also quite obvious that today only a small number of the population use their own heads to think and leave the power solely to the modern institutions of ‘knowledge distribution’. By using Aristotelian Logic, arguments can be used to produce truths, so long as the premises are true, and Descartes has provided this foundational truth. Using argument, talking to each other, one can find the commonality in all things, and discover what our own commonalties are as human beings and as elements in the state.
A discourse community has an agreed set of common public goals. It is a group of individuals that have a specific way of interacting and communicating with one another. It is also used as a means to maintain and extend a group’s knowledge, as well as initiate new members into the group. Specific kinds of languages are used as a form of social behavior. Such discourse communities vary in size, purpose and importance.
The mighty river flows through the mountains with liquidity and nurture providing life for all those who wish to take a sip from it. Yet the river is powerful in its own force destroying even the largest rocks, crumbling them into small pieces. People may be able to stop the river for a short time or even dry it up but the water always comes back in one form or another, every dam is bound to fail. Some people have been able to harness the power of the river, redirecting the mighty water making it flow in constructive ways. Similar to the river, language is influential. Its true power is not seen by the naked eye but by those who study it, those who use it as their ally in a war of linguistics. In Martin Luther King Jr.’s letter, Birmingham City Jail he is able to use all three rhetorical appeals to prove that demonstrations lead to negotiations and benefit for both sides of an argument.
Language is our power and expression is our freedom. Through a puff of air, we are able to communicate and influence the environments that surround us. Over the course of time humans have evolved, but by the means of language, humans have matured into humanity. The possibility of thought and emotions such as empathy show the ability to think with complexity. A crucial element that helps Suzanne K. Langer’s illustrate the essence of humanity throughout her essay “Language and Thought.” Langer thoroughly depicts what sets humans apart from the rest of the animal kingdom by explicitly stating “The line between man and beast […] is the language line” (120). Consequently, this implies that if a person is declined the freedom of language they are hardly considered human. Many people around the globe have had their voices silenced due to corrupt governments and the oppression of their culture. These individuals are subjected to the devastating effects of the loss of language, which in turn, translates to the loss of power. Language is our foundation for hopes and opportunity, for with out it a person is shell of possibility that is subjected to a passive existence.
Throughout the span of the past few weeks I have traversed the globe, visiting several countries and regions, only to realize that although new methods develop, language as a way of expressing ones self has remained the most effective. Despite this fact, language still has its pitfalls. Neil Postman, in his essay “Defending Against the Indefensible,'; outlines seven concepts that can be used to aid a student in better understanding the language as a means of communication. He describes how modern teaching methods leave a student vulnerable to the “prejudices of their elders';, further stating that a good teacher must always be skeptical. He urges teachers of all subjects to break free from traditional teachings as well as “linguistical tyranny';
How do groups of people in our society all interact with each other? There are so many different ways people communicate, whether by writing, speaking, or even educating. As John Swales, James Paul Gee, and James E. Porter express, it all has to do with the concept and involvement of a discourse community. The process of common goals and purposes being constructed with the knowledge gathered in a discourse community and expanded by literacy, linguistics, and experience. The authors, Swales, Gee, and Porter, all emphasize key characteristics that they believe best describe a discourse community. Yet, their characterization leaves behind a controversy on both legitimate control and trust a discourse community
Peter Geach’s essay on the Socratic fallacy poses a large problem for the Socratic method of obtaining answers to the What-is-F? question. He claims that Socrates makes an error when he refuses to accept examples as knowledge, primarily citing the Euthyphro as the source. In my last essay, I examined whether or not Socrates commits the Socratic fallacy in two of the early dialogues, namely, the Euthyphro and the Laches. So, I shall begin by giving a brief recapitulation of my previous essay as well as outlining Geach’s Socratic fallacy. Additionally, I will bring up an objection that Beversluis raises to my view. Then I shall explain the importance of the fallacy and the theory of the fallacy within the Socratic dialogues as it relates to
In the United States, the Anglo community is oppressing people of color because of their language, culture, and believes. For many years the Anglo has mistreated color races because they are different, causing anger and not understanding how it feels to be biracial. Latinos identities are robbed by not being able to speak Spanish in school. Therefore, the community in America needs to come together to fight against oppression and injustice caused by the difference in language and culture to improve equality for a group of people, who have lived marginalized throughout the years.
When discussing specific knowledge, it is often hard to pin down an exact definition of what it is you are discussing. Often a concept or word will get thrown around so often that it will begin to be taken for granted and when pressed, a person may struggle to pin down specifically what it is they mean. Realizing this, Socrates often went out and attempted to fix these kinds of problems and find out what people actually knew, compared to what they just thought they knew. In the dialogues Euthyphro and Meno, Socrates attempts to pin down definitions for piety and virtue, respectively. In doing so, we are shown that the thinkers in question struggle to define these terms, and attempt to do so in vague terms that may vary heavily under different circumstances. What Socrates is attempting to find is one definitive definition of piety and virtue, what is called his One Form Requirement. Rather than defining something by classifying different parts that make it up, Socrates maintains the belief that piety and virtue both can be simplified into one specific form that describes exactly what makes all F actions F.
The ideas that Plato instills are both detailed and distinctive, on the other hand he believes that actions do not necessarily justify a person but rather, he states that justness is more of an internal virtue. The idea he is trying to convey is that justness comes from the interpretation of the soul rather than the physical functions. The reasoning behind this is that if the soul remains just, then the resulting actions will reflect just ends. Once the fact that the soul must be just is accepted, the question arises of what qualifies the soul as just will need to be answered.
Languages are continually changing and developing, and these changes occur in many different ways and for a variety of reasons. Language change is detectable to some extent in all languages, and ‘similar paths of change’ can be recognised in numerous unrelated languages (Bybee, 2015, p. 139). Since users of language all over the world have ‘the same mental processes’ and ‘use communication for the same or very similar ends’ (Bybee, 2015, p. 1), similar changes occur on the same linguistic aspects, and in many cases these changes produce similar results in multiple languages. However, language change is limited by the function it performs. Languages must be learnt to such an extent which allows communication between the generation above and below one’s own (McMahon, 1994, p. 5). Hence language change is a gradual, lethargic process, as only small changes in
Justice is generally regarded as an important virtue. It is seen as the hallmark of a truly free and fair society, as well as one with a good sense of morality. The average person might see justice as a state where crime is not prevalent, and where individuals are fair and understanding towards one another. However, in order to reach a working definition for justice, one must consider its value and understand the components that make up a greater virtue. Throughout The Apology and Republic, Plato uses Socrates as a mouthpiece, attempting to explore find the true meaning of justice. Throughout The Apology, Socrates dispels commonly held views on the nature of justice and discusses how individuals
In her article, How Does Our Language Shape the Way We Think, Lera Boroditsky (2009) explains how the results of her experiments support the idea that the structure of language shapes the way we think. In one of her experiments, she found that English speakers would place cards showing temporal progression in temporal order from left to right, Hebrew speakers would place them right to left, and that the Kuuk Thaayorre would place them from east to west. This shows that the written language affects how time is represented to them. In another one of her experiments, she asked German and Spanish speakers to describe some items and found that the masculinity or femininity of the noun in their respective languages affects how it is ultimately described. This can also be seen in how artists represent the human form of abstract entities like death. Boroditsky concludes that “Language is central to our experience of being human, and the languages we speak profoundly shape the way we think, the way we see the world, the way we live our lives.” (Core reader p. 49) I would like to add that language is also the foundation of a person’s culture, pride, and self by exploring articles written by Eric Liu, Amy Tan, and Gloria Anzaldua.
Plato's rhetoric uses dialogue and dialectic as a means of making meaning known. Anthony Petruzzi says that Plato’s “Truth is neither a correspondence with an "objective" reality, nor does it exist solely as a coherent relation to a set of social beliefs; rather, truth is concomitantly a revealing and a concealing, or a withdrawing arrival” (Petruzzi 6). However, for Plato truth becomes a matter of correspondence or correctness in “the agreement of the mental concept (or representation) with the thing” (Petruzzi 7). In other words, the tr...
Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are far more likely to be able to civilly come to a conclusion about a particular topic, or at least further their original concept.
Language is the basis of human communication. It is a cultural and social interaction, and the way language is used is influenced by the circumstances in which it takes place (Emmitt, 2010, p. 49; Green, 2006, p. 2). Children become aware that there are different types of language, including languages used at home, at childcare and at school, as they observe and participate in various language situations (Fellowes & Oakley, 2014, p. 39). Some of these languages may be unfamiliar, and children will need to learn the different roles and uses of language. The different roles of language in a child’s life are, therefore, part of their growing understanding of how to behave in society and in a particular context. As they experience different types and uses of language, children develop an understanding of how to use language appropriately for any given situation.