TED Conversations

Chris Grimes

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

The universe is a conversation. It speaks a language that includes all things. Human beings speak a language that is based on division.

I am an artist. I am here writing words to discribe the abstration of all things using the language of man. How can we use anything so pathetic to conjour this totality of understanding. There is a bigger picture than " I am ". Mark speaks about the great triumphs of human beings due to language. What are they, compared to the simplest act in nature? Language takes parts from the whole and reassembles these parts into unconnected segments which appear to have a whole of their own. Nothing has any true meaning outside of its connection with all things. There is a universal language, isn't it time we started using it....again?

Related Talks:
+1
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb

    Frans Kellner 100+

    • 0
    TED Translator
    Sep 17 2011: Very true thoughts you're thinking yet thoughts they are. It is from feeling that we know.
    That's why I love that poem of Lynn, it is the proper response.

    Most people caught up in language know little.
    They measure the world in all it appears and got lost in the parts.
    They accurately describe what they see but from every answer they find a new host of questions arise.

    It is as with a map. To know where you are you have to zoom out to see all connections and relations.
    To see how to go you have to zoom in where in life you see yourself.
  • thumb

    lynn eschbach 30+

    • +1
    Sep 16 2011: You say, "How can we use anything so pathetic to conjour this totality of understanding" I think the following poem read out loud simply and eloquently disputes your argument.

    Daffodils (1804)
    I WANDER'D lonely as a cloud
    That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
    When all at once I saw a crowd,
    A host, of golden daffodils;
    Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
    Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.

    Continuous as the stars that shine
    And twinkle on the Milky Way,
    They stretch'd in never-ending line
    Along the margin of a bay:
    Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
    Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.

    The waves beside them danced; but they
    Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
    A poet could not but be gay,
    In such a jocund company:
    I gazed -- and gazed -- but little thought
    What wealth the show to me had brought:

    For oft, when on my couch I lie
    In vacant or in pensive mood,
    They flash upon that inward eye
    Which is the bliss of solitude;
    And then my heart with pleasure fills,
    And dances with the daffodils.

    By William Wordsworth (1770-1850).

    • Chris Grimes

      • +1
      Sep 17 2011: Thank you for your response Lynn. I think the poet is asking the reader to to see "but little thought" minus the words. He wants you to see the universe (daffodils) without the imposition of the words. so as to truley appreciate it as a whole. The poem is stunning in its plea to see in the purest sense.
    • thumb

      Thadeus Frei

      • 0
      Sep 17 2011: Poems like these is what I was referring to when I wrote that metaphors are the next step to transcending the rigidness common language.
  • thumb

    Gerald O'brian 50+

    • 0
    Sep 15 2011: What universal language are you talking about?
    And I feel that you're not giving words enough consideration. When I say "ElectroMagnetic Wave", I'm clicking on a folder in your brain holding everything that you know about it. You picture the schoolbook illustrations, symbols, practical experiences with water in a tub, ...whatever file you have in it...
    We're not understanding anything through words only, in that sense. I'd say graphic illustration is most of it, but not all of it.
    Words however are wonderful for transfering huge amounts of info without opening every single folder and getting lost in a crazy number of files.
    • thumb

      Thadeus Frei

      • 0
      Sep 15 2011: Just remember words are only as useful as they are crippling.

    • Chris Grimes

      • 0
      Sep 16 2011: Thank you for your response Gerald. The universal language is the universe unfolding. From the human point of view 1+1= 2. Universally if you take 1, which would be all things, can there be another 1? If there were another and you add them together would it not again equal 1? Conversely, in a universal sense, can you take 1/2 of one? Can you imagine 1/2 of everything in the universe? Every atom, bit , string, particle cut in half. I am at a loss to understand how we think we can find clarity in reduction Humans seem to want to cut things down to size so they can understand them better, unfortunately it is the opposite that occurs. Your files and folders are only 1/2 the story at best.
  • thumb

    Thadeus Frei

    • 0
    Sep 15 2011: Chris great conversation. I have often wondered about this stuff. Putting ideas and beauty into words is impossible, it's like putting an animal in a cage. Words have their definition that create their borders while what we say always have a dynamic sense in them. The best things transcend language for it is putting the idea of god into words (god being everything, the universe) it is putting the stillness of eternity and the state of enlightenment into words. Words are in fact the object of suffering. For now the best we can do is use metaphors and arts such as music (a form of expressive communication) to praise our exaltation. Namaste meaning: the light in me honors the light in you, the light in you honors the light in me.

    • Chris Grimes

      • 0
      Sep 16 2011: Thank you for your response Thadeus. We human beings seem so sure of our perspective. It is my wish that we as humans could take any aspect of nature and hold it in high regard, emulate it and find meaning for ourselves within it rather than beliving ourselves to be superior, outside and advanced from that which is the language of being.
Showing all 11 comments