TED Conversations

Vera Nova

Director Research Analysis, NOVA Town Futuristic Development

TEDCRED 30+

This conversation is closed.

Is our human language the most intelligent tool to communicate? Do you trust your intuition more than the words?

I MEAN OUR LANGUAGE-OF-WORDS. Perhaps we spend immensely more time on talking than any animal.

Even while using multiple devices for communicating practically in any distance on earth for exchanging our feelings or information, we still do not understand one another any better than millennia ago.

As we see on TED most of the time we discuss or argue over our man-made TERMS, which we commonly use, but understand/interpret in different ways. We spend a lot of time arguing over the words themselves, over their meaning.

How much confusion we create by using language and its conventional terms?

Is our human language the most intelligent tool to communicate after all?

Share:

Closing Statement from Vera Nova

“Our view of man will remain superficial so long as we fail to go back to that origin [of silence], so long as we fail to find, beneath the chatter of words, the primordial silence, and as long as we do not describe the action which breaks this silence. the spoken word is a gesture, and its meaning, a world.”

― Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception

I'd like to thank you every member who has participated in this challenging conversation.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 19 2014: Colleen

    Concerning your post to Lejan and myself of 1 day ago (which being tired I just mistakenly flagged thinking I was replying, no matter)

    1. I did not say that Lejan was attacking me; I opened with "what annoys me about people" a generalization and in regard to other TED conversations where this has occurred; had I been referring to Lejan I would have used his name within the paragraph concerned with the subject.

    2. Follow my own advice in regard to all I have taught; excuse me? The very reason for the controversies in conversations, is because nearly all that I put forward challenges orthodox thinking and its teachings; as it extends from my own intellect,rather that that which others have sought to both teach me, and make me swallow; and as such, convert me, nag me, coerce me, bully me into accepting and conforming to their beliefs.

    What has been going on in regard to my conversation with Lejan, is that Lejan simply cannot accept that intuition exists, because as I have said it is not something that can be coldly and clinically, or scientifically explained; only those who are intuitive, can accept the reality of intuition. But Lejan keeps insisting that it be explained, according to his filters; and because it cannot be done according to his filters, and on his terms; the conversation simply goes round and round in circles.

    So if you think you can explain intuition, according to his filters, then please do so, because I certainly cannot.
    • thumb
      Apr 19 2014: Hi Carl,
      Yes, I think it is important to walk our talk....follow our own advice because it makes communications more understandable and believable.

      I do not agree that all that you put forward challenges orthodox thinking and teachings......perhaps you think it is going to challenge in some way? Sometimes, it seems like you are already prepared to argue.....?

      I do not perceive anyone in this conversation trying to make you swallow anything, convert you, nag you, coerce you or bully you into accepting and conforming to their beliefs. I perceive people in this conversation trying to have a conversation with you. Do you want to do that?

      I do not agree with you that anyone in this conversation suggests that intuition does not exist.....I don't know where or how you are getting that idea Carl.

      A conversation CANNOT go round and round in circles unless TWO people contribute to that dynamic. If one person decides NOT to go round and round in circles, the circular conversation ends there. We all have a choice about that.
      • Apr 20 2014: Again you read into

        Not this conversation "Conversations and life in general" which you are obviously not aware of, and equally in regard to the controversial subjects covered on my web site.

        QT: I do not agree with you that anyone in this conversation suggests that intuition does not exist.....I don't know where or how you are getting that idea Carl.

        I was not referring to anyone else in this conversation; but rather in regard to my conversation with Lejan, within this conversation.

        And in this regard; I really do not need or want, your advice; and I am quite sure that Lejan is quite capable of taking care of himself.

        And yes I am always prepared to debate and argue; and carried out in a civilized manner; this world would be in a damn site better condition, and a much better world as a whole if others did so, rather than rolling over, accepting, and simply going along with the political, and media driven flow.
        • thumb
          Apr 20 2014: I am VERY aware of life Carl. I have no desire to review your web site Carl, because if it is any reflection of what you are projecting here in the TED conversations, it does not seem desirable.

          I am aware that you were referring to your conversation with Lejan....that is probably very clear to anyone reading your comments.

          I do not agree with you on some issues, and I have clearly expressed my thoughts, feelings and perceptions regarding those ideas with which I do not agree.

          You say you are always prepared to argue. How is that working for you Carl?
    • thumb
      Apr 19 2014: '...is that Lejan simply cannot accept that intuition exists, because as I have said it is not something that can be coldly and clinically, or scientifically explained'

      You are mistaking, Carl.

      I accept that intuition exist. I even base many of my decisions just on it and against my ratio.

      See:

      http://www.marriottsridge.net/~falcon9xr/postsecret_archive/2012_07_21/what_is_your_scientific_approa.html

      (The name changed, so find me by the picture)

      But I know that intuition can be horribly wrong, because it has been in my past and in my experience.

      Therefore I do not take my nor anyone else's intuition as valid explanation, leave alone evidence, about the meaning or purpose of natural phenomena and do not agree with those who do, because the universe is filled with counter-intuitive occurrences.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.