This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
After learning a language -Why can't anyone go back and narrate what and how one experienced during the first year?
It will be interesting to explore the reasons that fill the "gap of inability" between the most efficient language learning phase and "culture bound listening phase" as Patricia says . After learning a language what prevents one to go back and bring insights, describe from that efficient learning phase in one's life. Being convinced that these insights / description once known will be objectively measurable as well. It seems the challenge in using MEG has a bias. Thus - what are those factors that prevent one to go back and recall the baby experiences while a language gets learnt - it may add new vocabulary or use existing words in a new perspective to share with others.
Closing Statement from Charan Singh
Thank you all - the spectrum of responses - from Ed Schulte, Natasha Nikulina, Casey to Adriaan Braam- brought amazing insights on this theme. My question and replies were driven by the knowledge I acquired through some, available to humanity, core sources of Wisdom that are little explored - though seems extremely beneficial for solving our current problems. The reason to ask this question was to further explore and find equivalent knowledge terms that can be commonly understood by all. Must say I tried exploring ,not missing even a small reference about " The Word" and how little we know about The Word that manifests through language as our World. Interestingly, I learnt about a Oneness frequency C132/A 432 Hrz that further led me to a great related article link http://www.jwmt.org/v1n4/readlight.html and another book title: P.D.Ouspensky - The Fourth Way, that accepts and addresses to the question asked here " why one doesn't remember and how can one develop that memory that remembers everything " Present day Science or pedagogy - sorry to state, addresses or knows only about two dimensions of that memory that inherits the potential to be developed into four. It is not about religion or faith or worshiping - it is purely about the knowledge accessible to mankind that can be gained through - easy to make observations, experiments not subjective experiences, comparisons, analysis - and using all other tools a scientific mind would use or prefer to use.
I remain indebted to all who participated and shared their valuable inputs on this thread. Thank you.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Ed Schulte 50+
now that there is more time before closure here.
I just spent a hour or so at the local family loaded - farmers market - and so had lots of time to look into the eyes of young ( less then one year old) children being held or packed around the chaos and bustle of the market.
These eyes invited me to turn your question inside out and ask it from their ...very non-verbal perspective ...that being
..."Why can't Adults se the beauty all around here that I am seeing? and does 'learning a language' mean I am going to have to give up this awareness???!!"
Charan Singh
Ed Schulte 50+
Of course i am not saying anything new here.
It was said with great power by many with high high LOC .."unless ye become as children you not see the Kingdom of Heaven" but unfortunately most of the religions which have sprung out of his teaching reduce that to meaning to "become meek" . There is no meekness in being a powerful observer/reflector.
natasha nikulina 50+
it's very tempting to think this way, but somehow it goes against my experience.
I remember myself being 3/4 years old ( the closest i can get to my babyhood ) but no trace of sense of beauty there. There must be a kind of a residue, at least, but no, nothing !
I saw Beauty for the first time at the age of 18/20. And it can't be confused with 'Oh, it's so beautiful...wonderful...wow ! ' no, it's not like this, it's a direct EXPERIENCE when not a single word passes through your mind ! I haven't developed a talent to describe it, only the addiction to experience itself :)
Maybe Beauty is our adult way to come back to the Logos.
If it is a rational principle that governs the Universe “Absolute Beingness” a baby follows the Logos unconsciously, each second its body is growing, senses are developing... in accordance with the universal law. A baby is fully in it, fully belongs to it, trusts it. A baby is in the flow, and flow is the Logos.
Let's put it like this : Beauty doesn't recognise itself, a baby IS Beauty and is conscious neither of itself nor Beauty.
We, adults can re-cognise ( know again), see Beauty and at this moment be one with God/Joy/Logos again;
become as children and see the Kingdom of Heaven.
What do you think ? :)
Ed Schulte 50+
good that you brought this in here, Ty!!
Yes!! above all else it must be Clearly Understood that you ( One HUman as an emanation out of your true Self (Monad) is projected into this "lower" earthly form, to take an the Experiences required to the Higher Self ..as therefore the Source itself can know itself. It is NOT a competition!!! if you don't remember "Beauty" until "x"years old ...it is as required to establish it so that on the return process ..it will be appropriately integrated into Higher-Experienced-Self . And of course the same with Languages etc etc
But also "
Beauty doesn't recognise itself, a baby IS Beauty and is conscious neither of itself nor Beauty."
No No No.!!!! "Beauty does recognize itself. The primary reason for HUman to have its unique position in creation/manifestation is so that Source can recognize itself at all levels
natasha nikulina 50+
Someone said that "we need language to create the illusion that we are talking to the other " :)
Re : "Beauty does recognize itself. The primary reason for HUman to have its unique position in creation/manifestation is so that Source can recognize itself at all levels
Yes !
let me try again to explain what i meant by "Beauty doesn't recognise itself "
To re-cognise ( know again, be conscious of ) we need to be separated from Beauty and come back, re-unite with... on conscious level. If observer and observed are one (as they are ), no cognition, re-cognition is possible, hence "Beauty doesn't recognise itself " But separation is an illusion which is required for creating the distance between the observer and the observed to RECOGNISE Beauty. Beauty is downloaded in our DNA, it's like God it's within. We can't see it out there if we don't recognise it in here.
You told me , quoting Rumi , something like : when Beauty comes Love is always here ( Sorry, Rumi :) And it's true !
Are there any distinction between Beauty Love God Logos Truth ? We have different words , but neither of these are defined, for it is not possible to language it. We try , but what we get is : God is Love...Truth- Absolute...Beauty is Truth... Language is a code, Love Truth Beauty... partake no quality but its own. Different words for one experience and we may call it recognition. And yes, i share your belief that it's a " primary reason for HUman...." to be.
Is it any better now ? :)
Philip Cogswell