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.

  • thumb
    Apr 18 2014: What do you think regarding our sense of morality that gets so lost in the wording/interpretations?

    As scholars understand, Charles Darwin defends a naturalist approach to morality. It is my great interest in this Conversation/discussion. In The Descent of Man, he argues that moral behavior has outgrown from animal tendency for empathy through evolution of morality.

    By comparing human and animal behavior through a naturalist approach, he concludes that moral sense is based on the species' sociability, notably altruism.

    I think that if we ever try to learn from the best of the animal world, from its hidden from us interconnections and endless meanings of these interactions, our tool, as human language, would still be our main tool to communicate among ourselves. In any case it needs to be examined and re-examined over and over again, including its basic flaws..

    Learning basic ethics will help us get rid of lots of pretentiousness, tricks, stupidity and abuses of all sorts, so we would be able to spend more of our energy on sound creativity and true discoveries about ourselves and nature which our only ultimate school that we never graduate.
    • Apr 25 2014: Hi Vera

      Qt: As scholars understand, Charles Darwin defends a naturalist approach to morality. It is my great interest in this Conversation/discussion. In The Descent of Man, he argues that moral behavior has outgrown from animal tendency for empathy through evolution of morality.

      By comparing human and animal behavior through a naturalist approach, he concludes that moral sense is based on the species' sociability, notably altruism.

      I would agree with Darwin that moral behaviour did evolve through the animal kingdom, but also from the first living cell, up to the level of the animal kingdom. However the Descent of Man began, with the insatiable greed of ancient power hungry leaders/invaders/conquerors/dictators/monarchs; and more so with the later advent of Roman fascistic capitalism, which has evolved over time via the means of very many channels/paths/deceits - politics/networks/ “corporations” = multiple “cooperation’s”.

      To become an almost universal philosophy, of self-vested interests, and insatiable materialistic greed, that continues on the same basis of said self-vested interests, stirring up wars as a means of excusing their invasion’s.

      And in so doing, they continue their philosophy of privateering/pirating/taxing/coercing/under-rewarding, the energies/work/production of the common people; and thus with the power of the riches of their ill-gotten gains, gained by the power of their money and share markets, and the despicable lies of their quisling politicians, who while claiming to be, and paid by the public to serve and be right honourable public servants; instead serve their corporate masters in controlling, and selling off all of the common peoples funded assets/utilities, and all the common peoples common wealth, in the form of oil/minerals/forestry/agriculture.

      And in the vast darkness of this descent of man, I wonder if the Light of Universal Democracy/Cooperation stands a chance?
      • thumb
        Apr 25 2014: Not even a slightest doubt - there is no creature on earth that can torment and murder any livng being for just some psychotic IDEA, and moreover, enjoy every minute of the "process".

        First of all, if we want to survive as somewhat intelligent/intuitive creatures we must learn how to experience nature's reality - not our fantasies which are often sickly. Secondary-- I have no hope that this is going to happen - not in my life. I just admire rare individuals who are learning and care..Bless you.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.