Alek
Schoenberger
11/28/2012
How
Does language create reality?
(Rough
Draft)
Language has the power and ability to do
many things. As humanity is now in the age of science, we are gaining more
information and insight on how our world and the universe works. One study that
has been done during the age of science is an in depth study of nature, how
nature works, and how nature exist in the first place. Sciences look into
nature came with a very unexpected conclusion, a conclusion that is not being
accepted by mainstream science and a conclusion that will rock the foundations
of science as a whole. The conclusion on nature that science stumbled upon in
its thoroughly in depth study is that nature doesn’t exist at all, nature is
just a “Mere object of description” (McKenna). This conclusion signifies that
language, with all its power, has now introduced humans to the notion that the
world and the universe is language. Therefore, language has the power and
ability to create reality, because reality is language.
Authors are some of the best users of
language. Many famous authors have discussed languages power to determine or
influence reality in some way. One author in particular that has been one of
the leading components of the theory that the world is made of language and
that language creates reality is Terence McKenna. Outside of being an author,
McKenna also specializes in discussing metaphysics and philosophy. The theory
being argued has a lot to do with the previous subjects mentioned. To be fair
to science and its belief that language does not create reality, there is speculation
as to what it means for language to create reality. Is it that our perception
of physical reality are objects of
description or does it mean that language merely can determine or influence
reality? The complex argument here is whether the previously mentioned theories
are separate from one another or if they are one in the same. Is languages
ability to influence reality one in the same with the theory that language
creates reality or are the theories independent from one another?
If one believes that language does create
reality, then one can believe in a variety of ways in which language creates
reality. Author Morty Lefkoe has discussed through articles on the power of
language and its affects on the world. His take on the theory varied much different
than those, such as McKenna, as Lefkoe discussed how language can determine our
reality. With language, we as humans can categorize, distinguish, and create
the universe (Lefkoe). Lefkoe’s view on the language of reality came with much
discussion about the structure of different languages and how those different
languages use different basic word categories and relationships, this results
in people of different cultures perceiving the world around them in different
ways than those who speak a different language. The structure of various
languages causes the speakers of these languages to have varying perception of
the basic nature of reality (Ralph Strauch). Through McKenna’s theory that our
physical reality is an object of description and Lefkoe’s article on language
determining reality, both discussions speak of different dynamics to the
theory. However, both authors cover the language of reality so thoroughly that
the dynamics eventually merge at the conclusion of both authors overall point,
that point being that language indeed creates reality and that languages power
to determine or create reality are ideas that are not separate from each other,
but are very much the same.
As previously mentioned, mainstream
science does not accept the theory that language creates reality and that the
universe is made of language. The arguments from the side of science on this
issue vary just as the argument in favor of the theory that language creates
reality does, but like the arguments in favor of this theory, the arguments
from science eventually merge into one single conclusive argument. Some of the
arguments from science say that if language did create reality then
translations from one language to another would be impossible and that all
cultures with different languages would be scaled from one another, making
communication between cultures impossible (Richard M. Restak). Michelle
Marsonet of the university of Genoa makes the claim that it is absurd to think
that language creates and determines reality. She goes on to state that
language is relatively new, and that science shows us many parts of our
personality that are guided by non-linguistic criteria (Marsonet, University of
Genoa). Sciences overall claim to their argument is that language is not reality,
but a product of the human mind (Marsonet).
To be clear, not all writers believe
language creates reality and not all scientist believe that language does not
create reality. The overall point of the argument is that the idea that
language creates reality lies within a very philosophical and metaphysical
realm of possibility, whereas science rejects the theory because science hasn’t
found any evidence thus far to support whether the theory is true or not, but
that of course doesn’t mean that it is not true. Over the course of doing
research on this topic, both theories were looked into, whether it was the
scientific theory or the theory that language does create reality. Both
theories were looked at from fairly unbiased points of views, and the one that
just seem to appealing to not believe was that the world and the universe was
made of language. The idea that language creates reality is a very new emerging
theory that will shake the foundations of science, hence why science isn’t too
fond of the theory in the first place. However, all things come to an end, as
the human imagination expands and can start determining whether such a new age
theory is true, the age of science could come to a startling hault, and a new
age of human knowledge and information may emerge in its place.
Alek Schoenberger
Mrs. Andrews
English 1102-008
12 December 2012
(Final Draft)
Language has the power and ability to do
many things. As humanity is now in the age of science, we are gaining more
information and insight on how our world and the universe works. One study that
has been done during the age of science is an in depth study of nature, how
nature works, and how nature exists in the first place. Science’s look into
nature came with a very unexpected conclusion, a conclusion that is not being
accepted by mainstream science and a conclusion that will rock the foundations
of science as a whole. The in depth study showed that nature doesn’t exist at
all, nature was shown to be “mere object of description” (McKenna). This
conclusion signifies that language, with all its power, has now introduced
humans to the notion that the world and the universe is language. Therefore,
language has the power and ability to create reality, because reality is
language.
Authors are some of the best users of
language. Many famous authors have discussed languages power to determine or
influence reality in some way. One author in particular that has been one of
the leading components of the theory that the world is made of language and
that language creates reality is Terence McKenna. None of McKenna’s books talk
directly about or are strictly dedicated to this topic, but quite a few of his
books seek the questions on what language is and how it has affected human
history and therefore reality. His book “The archaic revival” is a good
example. Outside of being an author, McKenna also specializes in discussing
metaphysics and philosophy. The theory being argued has a lot to do with the
previous subjects mentioned. To be fair to science and its belief that language
does not create reality, there is speculation as to what it means for language
to create reality. Is it that our perception of physical reality are objects of
description or does it mean that language merely can determine or influence
reality? The complex argument here is whether the previously mentioned theories
are separate from one another or if they are one in the same. Is languages
ability to influence reality one in the same with the theory that language
creates reality or are the theories independent from one another?
If one believes that language does create
reality, then one can believe in a variety of ways in which language creates
reality. Author Morty Lefkoe has written numerous articles on the power of
language and its affects on the world. His take on the theory varied much different
than the likes of McKenna’s theory, as Lefkoe discussed how language can
determine our reality. With language, we as humans can categorize, distinguish,
and create the universe (Lefkoe). Lefkoe’s view on the language of reality came
with much discussion about the structure of different languages and how those
different languages use different basic word categories and relationships,
which results in people of different cultures perceiving the world around them
in different ways than those who speak a different language. The structure of
various languages causes the speakers of these languages to have varying
perception of the basic nature of reality (Ralph Strauch). Through McKenna’s
theory that our physical reality is an object of description and Lefkoe’s
article on language determining reality, both discussions speak of different
dynamics to the theory. However, both authors cover the language of reality so
thoroughly that the dynamics eventually merge at the conclusion of both authors
overall point. The point being that language indeed creates reality and that
languages power to determine or create reality are ideas that are not separate
from each other, but are very much the same.
As previously mentioned, mainstream
science does not accept the theory that language creates reality and that the
universe is made of language. The arguments from the side of science on this
issue vary just as the argument in favor of the theory that language creates
reality does, but like the arguments in favor of this theory, the arguments
from science eventually merge into one single conclusive argument. The
arguments from the side of science say that if language did create reality then
translations from one language to another would be impossible and that all
cultures with different languages would be scaled from one another, making
communication between cultures impossible (Richard M. Restak). Michelle
Marsonet of the University of Genoa makes the claim that it is absurd to think
that language creates and determines reality. She believes that language is a
sub-part of reality and that language fails at explaining an enormously large
number of features within reality. Her stance is clearly heavily favored toward
the side of science due to her belief that science can simply explain things
that language cannot. She goes on to state that language is relatively new, and
that science shows us many parts of our personality that are guided by
non-linguistic criteria, and when a challenge in the face of science arrives it
will push through with sciences ability to deepen our vision of reality
(Marsonet, University of Genoa). Sciences census claim on the matter is that
language is not reality, but a product of the human mind (Marsonet).
While sides remain divided on this issue,
one branch of science brings a whole new dynamic to the argument and the
theories at hand. That branch of science being linguistics. Linguistics is the
branch of science that studies human language. The way in which linguistics is
studied is through the division of three broad categories, such as language
form, meaning, and context. Is linguistics in any position to possibly bring
anything new to the table regarding languages role in shaping reality? There definitely
seems to be a compelling probability that certain sub-areas within the science
of linguistics can help humans further understand languages role in reality. One
area of linguistics that could use further study in order to dig deeper into
the language/reality theories is that of linguistic relativity. Linguistic
relativity finds a way to hold a position within this argument due to it being
the study of how language structure can affect the way people view and
conceptualize the world. Linguistics may hold an interesting position on
figuring out the answers to these theories that language creates reality and
should hold a firm position to those that argue against the theory. That is
because linguistics is a very complex science that brings about answers and
studies from numerous and diverse fields ranging from biology, psychology, and
philosophy amongst many other fields that help us understand our world and
universe, and it is interesting that linguistics brings these fields together
unlike other sciences. That poses the question of whether an in depth study of
languages role in reality by linguist can help meet ends with the study of
nature brought about by physicist and biologist? If so, then more interesting
insight and information into the language of reality theory can arise and be
further acted upon in order to continue putting the pieces together on this strange
idea.
While the theory on linguistics mentioned
previously is an interesting way at looking at a possible scenario in how we as
humans can gain a further understanding of what the world is. As it stands now
though, the two prevailing theories that try to explain what the world is and
how the world works are the scientific theory and the theory that the world is
language. These two theories play of a fundamental assumption on how the world
works. Science tells us that the world works through microscopic packets of
matter that move throughout empty space at nearly the speed of light, and that
matter is subject through interlocking laws of physics. The other theory of
course being the theory that the world is language, and that language has its
ability to create reality through our own human ability to be a co-creator of
reality. Our ability as a human to be a co-creator of reality is through our
acts of language and through the thoughts and ideas we sing into existence.
To
be clear, not all writers believe language creates reality and not all
scientist believe that language does not create reality. The argumentative
point is that the idea that language creates reality lies within a very
philosophical and metaphysical realm of possibility, whereas science rejects
the theory because science hasn’t found any evidence thus far to support whether
the theory is true or not. That of course doesn’t mean that it is not true.
Over the course of doing research on this topic, both theories were looked
into, whether it was the scientific theory or the theory that language does
create reality. However, people claim that linguistics is a science in and of itself.
Therefore, the conclusive theory may lie within neither sides favor or lie within
the favor of both. Both theories were looked at from fairly unbiased points of
views, and the one that just seemed to appealing to not believe was that the
world and the universe is made of language. The idea that language creates
reality is not necessarily a new emerging theory, but as the human imagination
continues to evolve and develop, we humans will eventually obtain the true
answer to these theories. When those answers present themselves, a huge hammer
may come down on the foundations of science and everything we humans thought we
knew about the world and the universe. All things come to an end, the age of
science could come to a startling halt, and a new age of human knowledge and
information may emerge in its place.
Lefkoe, Morty. “How Our
Language Determines Our Reality.”www.mortylefkoe.com, 8 June. 2010. Web. 11
December 2012
Lilly, John C.“Terence
McKenna Claims That Reality Is Made of Language." Ultrafeel.tv, 3 July.
2012. Web. 11 December 2012
Roskoski, Matt.
"Language Does Not Create Reality for Theory 1- Traditional."
Www.scribd.com, 10 October. 2011. Web. 11 December 2012
Hurd, R. Wesley.
"Postmodernism." Gutenbergcollege.edu, 21 June. 1998. Web. 11
December. 2012
Reflective commentary
This paper was hard to come up with a topic for initially due to their being so many diverse topics to choose from regarding the content of the paper. I ran through several different ideas when trying to come up with a topic I truly wanted to write my argumentative paper about. I feel I stumbled upon the right topic at the end of the day. I had a hard time trying to expand my topic into a 5 page essay but eventually pulled through with what I think is a solid final draft. I did enjoy researching my topic, because I learned alot more about what there was to know regarding my topic and gave me much insight on languages power to affect many things in our world. What I learned about myself through this assignment was that I am improving as a writer, but still have areas in my writing that can still use improvement. Those areas that can use improvement have been areas within writing that I seem to consistently struggle with more than others. Regardless, the implementing and development of this paper went pretty well and I am happy with the finished product.
No comments:
Post a Comment