Re: [xmca] The "Semantics" of Vowels and Consonants?

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

So, Joseph, consonants can be spoken as pure phonemes?
Related question: Are the name of the letters irrelevant to the 1st-2nd
graders in schools where you are?
They appear to be of considerable relevance in California.
mike

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com>wrote:

> Dear Mike Cole:
> The sound of the voiced "M" is mmmmmmmmmm, commonly uttered to express
> pleasure, as in the reaction to something good tasting. The name of the
> letter is a peripheral issue.
>
>                J.G.
>
>
> On Oct 12, 2010, at 6:44 PM, mike cole wrote:
>
>  David and Joseph.
>>
>> A question. The alphabetic character, M, may represent a phoneme. But can
>> one say the letter M without there being two phonemes there?
>> mike
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:26 PM, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>  I just want to pick up on ONE aspect of this (very long and almost
>>> completely unsourced) document, and try to source it, because it's a
>>> truism
>>> in our field that none of us can stand alone.
>>>
>>> Even if this were not true in an epistemological sense (there is only so
>>> much brilliance a lone genius is capable of) it would be absolutey true
>>> in a
>>> publishing sense (a long document is unpublishable without a long list of
>>> references, preferably including all of its potential reviewers).
>>>
>>> It's this:
>>>
>>> "The vocal sounds express/communicate states of the emotions first and
>>> foremost, and as an afterthought, so to speak, they are used to refer to
>>> things. They communicate emotion by moving the auditory apparatus of the
>>> hearer in a manner analogous to the movements of the vocal apparatus of
>>> the
>>> speaker, thereby creating in the hearer an emotion analogous to the
>>> emotion
>>> present in the speaker. Just as the touch of the hands conveys the intent
>>> of
>>> the toucher, so the vocal motion of the vocalizer creates in the hearer
>>> an
>>> emotional state analogous to that of the vocalizer."
>>>
>>> This is the "reception through production" theory of speech perception
>>> that
>>> was popular in the 1980s. It does have BIG advantages over passive
>>> theories
>>> of reception that preceded it(for one thing, it's much more parsimonious;
>>> the same system can be used for receiving speech and for transmitting
>>> it).
>>>
>>>  There are really TWO variations of this theory:
>>>
>>> a) The "motor" theory, associated with Alvin Liberman and the Haskins
>>> Laboratories. This theory relies on the idea of "articulatory gestures".
>>> By
>>> recognizing the kinds of "articulatory gestures" required by particular
>>> sounds, the hearer, through an act of empathy with the speaker, asks
>>> himself/herself "What would I be saying if I were making gestures like
>>> that
>>> in this situation?"
>>>
>>> b) The "analysis by synthesis" theory, associated with Chomsky and Halle
>>> at
>>> MIT. This theory relies on pure unempbodied ACOUSTIC knowledge rather
>>> than
>>> articulatory gestures. By recognizing the acoustic patterns (see the
>>> theory
>>> of "distinctive features" laid out in Chomsky and Halle, The Sound
>>> Patterns
>>> of English), the hearer through an act of empathy with the speaker, asks
>>> himself/herself "What would I be saying if I were making gestures like
>>> that
>>> in this situation?"
>>>
>>> I think that BOTH of these variants of the theory have in common a
>>> recognition that in perception we get a lot more than we hear; people do
>>> NOT
>>> rely on the stream of vowels and consonants as their sole source of
>>> information. Perception is a supreme act of what Bruner calls "going
>>> beyond
>>> the information given".
>>>
>>> Contrary to this, all theories of perception which are based on an
>>> analogy
>>> with the ALPHABET assume that the stream of vowels and consonants really
>>> does carry the information (or, as Joseph Gilbert puts it, emotion).
>>>
>>> In Vygotsky's time, this theory was advocated by the brilliant futurist
>>> poet Khlebnikov, who wrote quite extensively on the "emotional valence"
>>> of
>>> particular phonemes, and constructed whole poems on this association
>>> (e.g.
>>> "Zangezi", which was composed after a long series of experiments on the
>>> "semantics" of individual phonemes). As you can imagine, they don't
>>> translate very well!
>>>
>>> David Kellogg
>>> Seoul National University of Education
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Mon, 10/11/10, Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] The Genetic Belly Button and the Functional Belly
>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>> Date: Monday, October 11, 2010, 11:03 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>                                                                1
>>>
>>>                     Language Creates Culture
>>>
>>>    Language functions, in human society, as the generator of culture. By
>>> the effects on
>>> us of the sounds we utter, we inform ourselves of the effects on us of
>>> the
>>> things which
>>> make up our world. Since the only sense of the meaning of any thing is
>>> one
>>> and the same
>>> as the effect on us of the thing, and since we relate to our world
>>> through
>>> our words, language informs us of the meanings of things. This informing
>>> takes place when we use vocal sounds as words to refer to things.
>>>
>>>    We exist in a vacuous condition vis-à-vis any objective knowing the
>>> ultimate meaning of anything. We do not know the ultimate affect on us of
>>> anything. If we operated by instinct, our choices would not depend on
>>> knowing, as our choices do. In this culls context, we are informed by the
>>> affects on us of the sounds of our words of the affects on us of the
>>> things
>>> to which our words refer.
>>>
>>>    In the vacuum of outer space, a ship can be propelled by the constant,
>>> subtle force of an ion drive. In the outer space of our cluelessness as
>>> to
>>> the meaning of anything, we are informed of that meaning by the affect on
>>> us
>>> of the sounds of our words.
>>>
>>>    Spoken language is sound made by the body and used to refer to, to
>>> signify, things. We must thoroughly understand the basis of language in
>>> order to understand anything else about language. Why do we use certain
>>> words to signify certain things? Why are there similarities and
>>> differences
>>> among the various languages in how sound is used to refer to things? Is
>>> there a correlation between and among emotional states and vocal sounds?
>>> These and other questions must be answered if we are to know how language
>>> works.
>>>
>>>    We are born into a language-using group and learn the meanings of the
>>> things that
>>> make up our world simply by learning our group’s language.
>>>
>>>    We have a distinct and unique reaction to each vocal sound just as we
>>> do to
>>> each facial expression and postural position. All forms of body language,
>>> postural, facial
>>> and vocal, are expressions of states of our internal goings-on, are born
>>> of
>>> those feeling/emotional states. and recreate these states by resonant
>>> entrainment.
>>>
>>>        The languages we humans speak currently are the results of the
>>> experiential contributions of our ancestors. However they, (our distant
>>> relatives), felt about whatever they had words for, we now feel again in
>>> the
>>> present moment, when we utter the words they originally uttered.
>>> Therefore
>>> language functions somewhat as a seed: the experience of past peoples was
>>> represented in the words they spoke and now, when we voice those words,
>>> we
>>> re-experience what they did.
>>>
>>>    Language is institutionalized perception. How we, as a society,
>>> perceive our world, is
>>>                                                    2
>>>
>>> determined by the the affects on us of our vocal sounds, (a form of body
>>> language), we use to refer to the things that make it up.
>>>
>>>    Our actions are determined by our perceptions. If we want to change
>>> the
>>> way we act we must change the way we perceive our world. And we can
>>> change
>>> how we perceive our world by changing how we refer to the things that
>>> constitute our world.
>>>
>>>    The feelings/emotions of actors on stage and of all of us, are
>>> communicated by our actions. The way someone moves tells us much about
>>> how
>>> they feel. Our face conveys extensive and subtle information about our
>>> emotional state. The sounds of our voices carry emotional content. And,
>>> although we normally are not aware of it, the articulate vocal sounds,
>>> (the
>>> sounds of our vowels and consonants), are loaded with information about
>>> our
>>> emotional goings-on. The information that comes from the articulate
>>> sounds
>>> of our words rather than from the emotional overlay we place on them due
>>> to
>>> our transitory emotional states, is the same no matter what moods we may
>>> be
>>> experiencing while we speak. That aspect of information conveyance is
>>> institutionalized/standardized. The tone of voice, cadence, and volume
>>> dynamics can be unique to each situation without altering the fundamental
>>> referential communication.
>>>
>>>    One can experience the effect on ourselves of the various vocal sounds
>>> by, while in a sensitive, receptive mode, saying those sounds out loud
>>> and
>>> sensing their effects. I have done that and have, it seems, discovered
>>> their
>>> meanings. You can do that also. Doing so oneself will give one a more
>>> complete sense of the effects of vocal utterances than one could
>>> experience
>>> by reading what someone else has written about the effects of the vocal
>>> sounds on the emotions.
>>>
>>>    This covert function of language must be brought to light  in order
>>> for
>>> us to be able to understand the importance of recreating culture. We must
>>> understand that our behavior, as a society, is fundamentally linked to
>>> our
>>> culture, which is a result of our language.
>>>
>>>    We do not objectively know the ultimate meaning of anything and
>>> consequently experience our sense of the meanings of things from the
>>> effects
>>> on us of our words.
>>>
>>>    These familiar phrases suggest a perception, perhaps a mystical
>>> perception, of the importance of the spoken word.
>>>
>>>    The final word.
>>>
>>>    What’s the word?
>>>
>>>    In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word
>>> was God.
>>>
>>>    The tongue is the rudder of the soul. It is not what passes into our
>>> lips that defiles us but
>>>                                                    3
>>>
>>> every untoward utterance that proceeds out of our mouths.
>>>
>>>    Words, as sounds, affect us subliminally, supplying us with a feeling
>>> for whatever we name. It is that feeling that we experience from the
>>> sounds
>>> of our words that supplies us with a subliminal consensus for our
>>> world-view.
>>>
>>>    We cannot realistically expect humans to act in a way contradictory to
>>> their culture’s bias. Marx’s economic/social theory was used as a
>>> rallying
>>> standard to
>>> enable regime change. After those individuals who had experienced the
>>> tyranny of the czar had left the scene, the body-politic eventually
>>> rejected
>>> collectivism, (the transplanted economic organ). Russian culture is
>>> fundamentally the same as it was when the roots of its present language
>>> were
>>> established and Russian society naturally reverted to its cultural
>>> default
>>> mode after the revolution. After a short time, the czar was replaced by
>>> the
>>> head commissar. Marx held that the economic relationships within society
>>> create all other human relations. It seems that culture is the cause of
>>> the
>>> nature of human relationships within any society.
>>>
>>>                                                      The Culture Made Us
>>> Do It
>>>                                          “The unrecognized function of
>>> language”
>>>
>>>    As an iceberg exists mostly under the surface of the water which
>>> supports it, the fundamental consequence of language tends to be hidden
>>> under the surface of our awareness. Most crucial human activities go on
>>> without awareness, for example, all of the bodily functions. Many
>>> conscious
>>> activities proceed without much deliberate awareness. Once one knows well
>>> how to drive a car, much less awareness is needed to operate the vehicle.
>>> The subconscious mind supports the same kinds of activities as does the
>>> conscious mind, however with less effort. Anything that can be automated,
>>> is.  Automating essential activities frees the conscious mind to focus on
>>> issues about which we feel we need to learn in order to more effectively
>>> cope, (those issues that require conscious attention until new behavioral
>>> patterns are in place). There is no need to be aware of processes that
>>> take
>>> place well enough without attention. It is only when a problem arises
>>> that
>>> we
>>>  humans, in an attempt to solve it, focus our awareness on it. If we are
>>> coping well enough without awareness, why be aware? We don’t fix
>>> something
>>> if it doesn’t seem broken. We don’t reinvent our wheel as long as it’s
>>> rolling. However, upon examination, our human condition appears to have
>>> been
>>> painfully broken for as long as we can recall, and must be repaired. How
>>> may
>>> we fix it?
>>>
>>>    Could it be that our behavior is governed by something that we cannot
>>> see, something of which we are not cognizant? Is there anything in our
>>> nature that would preclude such a possibility, the possibility that our
>>> behavior may be directed by influences not within the purview of our
>>> everyday consciousness? What could such a force be?
>>>
>>>    The ability to produce simple vocal sounds made it’s appearance on the
>>> scene before our
>>>                                                    4
>>>
>>> progenitors made words of those sounds. The ability to vocalize
>>> articulately is a prerequisite to the ability to verbalize. Words
>>> appeared
>>> when our ancient ancestors became cognizant of the relatedness of stimuli
>>> to
>>> their own vocal reactions to them. When they began deliberately using
>>> vocalizations to bring to mind things, they made the transition between
>>> deriving their sense of the meaning of things by direct experience of the
>>> things to deriving a sense of the meaning of things by experiencing the
>>> affects of the sounds of the words for the things. This supersession of
>>> the
>>> primal world by the linguistic world was the start of culture.
>>>
>>>    Being able to talk about things was very advantageous to our distant
>>> relatives. They could confer and plan. More important, they experienced a
>>> common sense of the meaning of the things in their world by using common
>>> symbols with which to refer to them.
>>>
>>>    Culture was advantageous to our ancestors in the ancient,
>>> pre-industrial environment. Now our technology provides us with the power
>>> to
>>> create and reside in an artificial environment, however one made
>>> according
>>> to the values inherent in our primitive culture. Our culture provides us
>>> with marching orders and our technology enables us to march very
>>> forcefully.
>>> Are we marching toward the edge of a precipice?
>>>
>>>    All action is preceded by a decision to act, be that decision
>>> consciously or subconsciously made. All decisions are based on a
>>> consideration of the consequences of those decisions. These effects on us
>>> of
>>> the consequences of our actions are the same as and identical with the
>>> meanings of those actions. How do we know the meanings of things? How do
>>> we
>>> know the affects on us of any thing? Do we know the effects on us of
>>> things
>>> directly as a consequence of our direct experience with them or by
>>> indirect
>>> experience with them by using and experiencing the words for those
>>> things?
>>>
>>>    Language is the factory and culture is the product. Culture is an
>>> abstraction and language is the physical mechanism from which it springs.
>>> Language is emotionally evocative sounds used to represent things,
>>> thereby
>>> conveying to us a sense of the affects-on-us/the-meanings-of those
>>> things.
>>> Our sense of our own role in our culture provides us with our identity
>>> and
>>> therefore with guidance for our behavior. The cultural values, derived
>>> from
>>> our ancestors’ experiences long ago, as represented in our language, are
>>> instilled in us and direct our behavior today. A body continues in its
>>> state
>>> of motion unless it is acted upon by an outside force. Human culture will
>>> remain fundamentally unchanged unless it is deliberately changed; and
>>> that
>>> will not happen unless we feel the need to do so and know how to do it.
>>>
>>>    Culture resides in the subconscious mind. Many others have spoken
>>> about
>>> the need to change the way we, as a society, think: many have tried, by
>>> using means such as meditation, sleep deprivation, psychoactive
>>> substances,
>>> chanting, philosophical inquiry, etc. to accomplish this change and may
>>> have
>>> been successful to a degree. However, it seems they were not able to
>>> lastingly infuse into society at large their newfound vision, due to not
>>> addressing the status quo at the
>>>                                                    5
>>>
>>> root/source, which is the culture. Understanding how language functions
>>> makes it possible to change our culture.
>>>
>>>                       How did language arise?
>>>
>>>    How did language arise? Originally, our progenitors’ vocalizing only
>>> expressed internal-goings-on/emotion and did not refer to anything
>>> external
>>> to them. It was advantageous to members of the group to be informed of
>>> the
>>> emotional conditions of other members. Much later, when consciousness
>>> developed enough for them to see the connectedness of the sounds uttered
>>> to
>>> the things the sounds were uttered in reaction to, they realized that
>>> they
>>> could bring to mind the thought of the things by uttering their
>>> associated
>>> sounds, (names). The beginning of talking about things was the start of
>>> culture,and the talking about things refocused the talkers’ conscious
>>> attention away from the experience of the emotional reactions to the
>>> sounds
>>> of the words, and toward thoughts related to the things to which the
>>> words
>>> referred. While they were busy directing their attention to thoughts
>>> related
>>> to the things to which the words referred, they were being emotionally
>>>  affected by the vocal sounds they were making to form their words. So,
>>> the
>>> effects of the sounds they were making vocally were experienced
>>> subliminally, while
>>>
>>> consciously, they were dealing with the thoughts of the things referred
>>> to
>>> by their words. The affects-on-us/meanings-of things cannot be proven.
>>> All
>>> they had and all we have to go on are the effects on us of the things and
>>> the effects on us of the sounds of the words that represent the things.
>>> While the effects of the things are changeable through time and somewhat
>>> unique to each individual, the effects on us of the sounds of the words
>>> are
>>> relatively consistent and universal. Having nothing else to go on, we
>>> accept
>>> the effects on us of the vocal sounds of words as revealing/representing
>>> the
>>> effects on us of the things referred to by the words. In this way,
>>> culture
>>> is formed and passed to succeeding generations. Our world views typically
>>> come from the sense of the meaning of things as represented by the sounds
>>> of
>>> our words rather than from the sense of meaning we may gain from the
>>> direct
>>> experience of the things themselves.
>>>
>>>    Do vocal sounds, themselves, communicate? When someone utters a vocal
>>> sound, such as a sigh, a growl, a whimper, a scream, etc., do we get a
>>> sense
>>> of how they are feeling? If so, they are communicating their condition.
>>> How
>>> does that communication take place? Do we receive information
>>> communicated
>>> in such a manner consciously, subconsciously or by both ways? What is the
>>> means by which an emotion can be conveyed by sound? Can emotion, or
>>> anything
>>> else be communicated by the articulate sounds of our vowels and
>>> consonants,
>>> or do only non-articulate vocal sounds convey meaning? If we allow that
>>> vocal sounds, simply as sounds, communicate,  then is it possible or
>>> likely
>>> that the vocal sounds we use to make words also communicate as well when
>>> used as words? What would be the effect of using inherently emotionally
>>> meaningful sounds as symbols to represent external things? Would the
>>> inherent meaning of the sounds affect our perception of the things
>>>  represented by the sounds?
>>>
>>>                                                    6
>>>
>>>    These considerations may shed light on the issue of the root causes of
>>> human behavior. Naturally, those who contemplate our condition and would
>>> improve it if they could, would be attentive to these matters.
>>>
>>>    All of life’s processes exist as movements. Emotional conditions are
>>> patterns of motion. Similar structures, in keeping with the mechanics of
>>> resonation, impart, on each other, their movements. Our vocal apparatuses
>>> facilitate our ability to move with each other.
>>>
>>>    The vibrations made by the body convey the condition of the emotional
>>> body to other similar/human emotional bodies, and to some degree, to
>>> other
>>> animal emotional bodies. The more similar the other body, the more the
>>> condition is transposed. Humans receive each others’ vocal and other
>>> body-language communications more readily than other species receive
>>> human
>>> communication. Similar structures transmit their resonation/vibration to
>>> each other more readily than do dissimilar structures.
>>>
>>>    My quest for understanding of human behavior began long ago. When I
>>> was
>>> around the age of six, I became increasingly aware that the folkways and
>>> formal institutions of our society were lacking in humanity and common
>>> sense. I asked myself why this was so. As a child, I attributed the
>>> problem
>>> to people’s personal psychology and it was not until I was in my late
>>> teens
>>> that I realized that the cause of the problem is our culture. It was
>>> shortly
>>> after that that I understood how verbal/vocal communication works. The
>>> cause
>>> of The Problem seemed and seems to be the culture which is created by the
>>> relationship between vocal sounds and what they, as words, refer to.
>>>
>>>    Some of the reasoning that preceded this realization was first, that
>>> we
>>> are not created evil, but rather simply with survival instincts. Second,
>>> that if we were able to act sanely/rationally, we would be doing what
>>> produces the best results for everyone. Third, it must be something we
>>> learned, some misinformation, that causes us to behave in ways not in our
>>> own self-interest. Fourth, when I considered the question of from where
>>> this
>>> false information came, I identified as the source, the culture. Later, I
>>> realized that we do not, for sure, know the meaning of anything, and
>>> that,
>>> as far as we know, the only thing constant and predictable about any
>>> thing
>>> is its name, (the word-sound we produce in order to bring to
>>> consciousness
>>> whatever thing to which we choose to refer). After a time, I became aware
>>> of
>>> how the different vocal sounds we produce when we speak words, each
>>> create
>>> in us a unique effect and how those effects inform us subconsciously of
>>>  the affect on us, (the meaning), of the thing itself to which the word
>>> sounds refer.
>>>
>>>    At this time, I also learned that the sequence of sounds of the
>>> letters
>>> of our alphabet represents a sequential delineation of
>>> emotional/experiential events. From A to Z, the succession of the sounds
>>> of
>>> the letters of our alphabet is an example of
>>> pattern-projection/recognition,
>>> the pattern, in this case, being the seminal emotional events that humans
>>> experience during their lives, in chronological order.
>>>
>>>                                                    7
>>>
>>>    Emotions happen to us: They seem to come from the “great mystery”,
>>> God,
>>> or whatever image we may use to portray a place from which strong and
>>> compelling feelings emanate.
>>>
>>>    Given, all the vocal sounds that people can make, how would one
>>> arrange
>>> the sounds sequentially and from what archetype, (model), would the
>>> pattern
>>> of that sequence come? Even if the originators of the present alphabet
>>> deliberately imposed a pattern on their arrangement of the letter-sounds,
>>> whatever world view that existed in their minds caused them to feel most
>>> comfortable with the sequence of sounds they chose. The sequence they
>>> chose
>>> must have been agreeable with the story that was represented in their
>>> minds
>>> by those sounds in that sequence. If one admits that vocal sounds affect
>>> us,
>>> then how could a story, a sequence of affects,  not be told by the
>>> sequence
>>> in which the sounds exist? Whether or not the originators of any
>>> particular
>>> alphabet had a conscious reason for arranging the sounds of that alphabet
>>> in
>>> the sequence in which they appear, subconscious reasons were influencing
>>> their arrangement none the less. Does this story, told by our
>>>  alphabet make sense? Does it seem to be an accurate representation of
>>> the
>>> main events in a human’s life?
>>>
>>>    We tend to cling to our culture as if our lives depended on it, as a
>>> drowning person might cling to a life preserver. Culture offers an
>>> answer,
>>> -in this case subconsciously apprehended-, to the question,  “What are
>>> the
>>> meanings of things?” Without culture, there tends to be no consensus
>>> about
>>> what things mean. Language informs us of the meanings of named things by
>>> the
>>> affects on us of the sounds of our words. Those who use the same language
>>> experience the same sense of the meanings of the things that make up
>>> their
>>> worlds. That sense emanates from the deep levels of their subconscious
>>> and
>>> their final assessment of the meanings of things results from their
>>> processing that deep, culturally caused base sense of meaning through the
>>> lens of their perception of their own relationship to the society in
>>> which
>>> they live.
>>>
>>>    For the sake of clarity, let us consider, hypothetically,  what the
>>> result/s would be of using meaningful sounds to refer to things. Would
>>> the
>>> meanings of the sounds spill over into the perceived meanings of the
>>> things
>>> or would the meanings of the things influence the perceived meanings of
>>> the
>>> sounds? Or would neither influence the other or would they influence
>>>  each
>>> other? Which has a stronger meaning-pressure, the sounds we make with our
>>> voice or the things which, with the sounds, we name?
>>>
>>>    The vocal sounds express/communicate states of the emotions first and
>>> foremost, and as an afterthought, so to speak, they are used to refer to
>>> things. They communicate emotion by moving the auditory apparatus of the
>>> hearer in a manner analogous to the movements of the vocal apparatus of
>>> the
>>> speaker, thereby creating in the hearer an emotion analogous to the
>>> emotion
>>> present in the speaker. Just as the touch of the hands conveys the intent
>>> of
>>> the toucher, so the vocal motion of the vocalizer creates in the hearer
>>> an
>>> emotional state analogous to that of the vocalizer.
>>>    Just as our becoming-human progenitors were gaining consciousness,
>>> (the
>>> ability to
>>>                                                    8
>>>
>>> contemplate the consequences of their actions), they were, for the first
>>> time, using vocal expressions as words to refer to specific things, not
>>> only
>>> to express immediate emotional goings-on. Since they vocalized primarily
>>> under duress, their words were expressions born of fear rather than of
>>> conscious understanding. The mind concentrates on problems, on issues
>>> that
>>> could potentially be destructive to the perceiver. When this fear-based
>>> thinking bias becomes institutionalized in language, the language itself
>>> is
>>> a source of anxiety. The more we verbalize about any given problem, the
>>> more
>>> stressed-out we become. This reminds me of an Eskimo method of killing a
>>> wolf. They would smear congealed blood on a very sharp knife and set it
>>> out,
>>> with the blade pointing upward, where wolves frequented. When a wolf
>>> licked
>>> the blood, it would bleed and lick its own blood not knowing it was
>>> bleeding
>>> to death. We are wolfish for knowledge and we pursue it by using our
>>>  main thinking tool, our language.
>>>
>>>                       The Unrecognized Role of Language
>>>
>>>    Culture is the hidden law-of-the-land. We are creatures of culture,
>>> and
>>> its subjects. Our culture originally  enhanced our survivability and, in
>>> a
>>> technologically advanced world, may become the instrument of our
>>> destruction. Our culturally motivated ways of relating to one another may
>>> have once been viable, although perhaps immoral, and now, with our
>>> powerful
>>> ability to cause environmental change, are untenable.
>>>
>>>     ”The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of
>>> thinking...the solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind. If
>>> only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker.” --- Albert Einstein
>>>
>>>    I wish to change what is in that “heart”.
>>>
>>>    The referential function of human language is merely the “tip of the
>>> iceberg” of the role of language. Its larger and more profound function
>>> is
>>> unacknowledged: It is spoken language’s informing us of the meanings of
>>> all
>>> to which we verbally refer. We are moved in a primal way by the sounds we
>>> produce with our voice and, in the absence of any “objective”, absolute
>>> information regarding (the affects on us)/(the meanings of) the things of
>>> our world, we accept the affects on us of the vocal sounds of our words
>>> as
>>> representing the affects on us of the things to which our words refer. In
>>> this way, we are informed subliminally, simply by learning our language,
>>> of
>>> the meaning of our world. How else could we, as very young children, have
>>> achieved a sense of how we were affected by the numerous things that made
>>> up
>>> our world?
>>>
>>>    This matter is of paramount importance because we act in accordance
>>> with how we perceive our world, (with what our world means to us), and
>>> our
>>> sense of that meaning is derived from  the affects upon us of our words.
>>> Much of human behavior that is commonly attributed to “human nature” is
>>> actually motivated by cultural nature, which is created by language.
>>>                                                    9
>>>
>>>    How and what would our society be if we had a culture which instilled
>>> in us the values that we would consciously choose to hold? Presently, we
>>> simply assimilate the culture in which we are born. Once we understand
>>> the
>>> mechanism of cultural transmission, we will be able to change our group
>>> program.
>>>
>>>    However, it seems that many of us may be too timid to venture forth
>>> from the false security of our unquestioned and familiar values. Some
>>> have
>>> expressed to me that language is a product of nature and that to change
>>> it
>>> deliberately would produce an unnatural result, a Frankenstein culture,
>>> the
>>> consequences of which would probably be destructive. To those I suggest
>>> that
>>> we are inherently unable to venture out of the natural realm, as we are
>>> inextricably woven into the web of nature. Furthermore it is entirely
>>> correct and wholesome for us, with the goal of improving our
>>> survivability,
>>> to choose to correct our culture at its source. Once we see how we may
>>> help
>>> ourselves, we would be within our progressive evolutionary tradition to
>>> use
>>> all our knowledge to do so.
>>> .
>>>    Vocal sounds either communicate as vocal sounds or they do not. If we
>>> assume that vocal sounds do not communicate, then language only blindly
>>> and
>>> unintelligently refers to things. If we assume that vocal sounds do
>>> communicate something, as vocal sounds, then language does more than
>>> merely
>>> refer to things: it also informs us about the things named. Which is
>>> true?
>>> Do any of us believe that our vocal sounds do not express/communicate
>>> anything? If we believe that vocal sounds communicate/express something,
>>> then what is it that they communicate/express? If vocal sounds do
>>> communicate as sounds, do they loose that communicative function when
>>> incorporated into words or do they continue to be expressive when used in
>>> words?
>>>
>>>    If vocal sounds that constitute words communicate something as sounds,
>>> then what effect does the sound of a word exert on our perception of the
>>> thing to which that word refers?
>>>
>>>    Many seem to have difficulty accepting the idea that the primary
>>> meanings of vocal sounds, including the sounds of words, are the effects
>>> they cause within each of us and not the things to which they refer when
>>> uttered as words. Another point that aided me in understanding the
>>> function
>>> of language is that we really do not know the meaning of anything but
>>> rather
>>> behave as though our taken-for-granted assumptions are valid only because
>>> they have not been held to the light of inquiry. It is only that which
>>> resides in our subconscious and of which we are not conscious and
>>> consequently do not question, that we act as if we “know” for sure.
>>> Remember
>>> the caterpillar in Alice in Wonderland? When asked how he managed to
>>> coordinate the movements of all those legs, he became aware of the
>>> previously unconscious process of walking and then could not walk. The
>>> only
>>> sense of the meanings of things that we dependably share with the others
>>> of
>>> our society is
>>>  instilled in each of us by the relationship between the sounds of our
>>> words and the things to which those words refer. Words are the link
>>> between
>>> our autonomic, cultural sense of meaning and the things that make up our
>>> world. We give things a familiarity by attaching to them sounds created
>>> by
>>> our body. Our words are related to things because the vocal sounds of our
>>> words are related to our reactions to those things. We may not ordinarily
>>> experience an emotional reaction to the things that
>>>                                                    10
>>>
>>> make up our world. It is during our seminal moments that we experience
>>> emotional reactions to things.
>>>
>>>    What meaning, if any, do things have if we are not affected by those
>>> things? All meaning is relative. If we were totally unaffected by
>>> something,
>>> would it be meaningful? How would whatever meaning it may have be
>>> perceived?
>>> Clearly, what we want to know about something, (anything), is how it
>>> affects
>>> us, (what it is?).
>>>
>>>     After many attempts to share these findings with those in academia,
>>> their lack of understanding, even more their lack of interest in
>>> understanding the ideas I was putting forth , dampened my impulse to
>>> reach
>>> out to those whom I previously had thought were most likely to understand
>>> these findings.
>>>
>>>    I figured that what I was saying was challenging on a deep level to
>>> most, who would otherwise gain a glimpse of it. My discovery, seems to
>>> threaten the sense of security of those who consciously or otherwise
>>> treat
>>> their culture as an idol. Some of us, especially those of highly
>>> exercised
>>> intellectual abilities, feel that security is to be had by being able to
>>> “explain” the meaning of things. By uttering words, (sounds), about
>>> things,
>>> what meaning is revealed? Doing so may create the illusion of
>>> understanding
>>> by seeming to make the named things familiar. But does it, only inform us
>>> with the effect/meaning of the sounds of words, or with the meaning of
>>> the
>>> things as well? What are the meanings of the things?
>>>
>>>    It appears that culture is the root of all normal human behavior. We
>>> all behave according to our values and assumptions and those derive from
>>> our
>>> culture. Do our academicians know what culture is, how it relates to the
>>> people who are instilled with it and how it may be changed?
>>>
>>>    We are informed subliminally of the meaning of our world by the
>>> language that we speak.
>>>
>>>    Why is it so difficult for people to understand how language generates
>>> culture? What is/are the missing piece/s of information that they need in
>>> order to grasp that concept?
>>>
>>>    A better way is possible. We need only the vision of this better
>>> world,
>>> as an everyday experience, in order for us to act in accord with it. The
>>> consciousness of how to act in order to create the world we wish must be
>>> the
>>> status quo, not the rarity that it now is. This changing of the status
>>> quo
>>> can be accomplished by changing the culture and changing culture is
>>> accomplished by changing language.
>>>
>>>    Are we conscious that we are affected by the sounds we make with our
>>> voice? We are commonly aware that the quality of singers voices affects
>>> us.
>>> We know that great orators and actors affect us with their delivery and
>>> vocal character. Everyone’s voice affects us. We are aware of the affect
>>> of
>>> tone of voice but not of the affect of articulated phonemes per se.
>>>                                                    11
>>>
>>>    We have no way of knowing the final meaning of anything. We might
>>> think
>>> we know what a thing will do to us in the immediate future but what about
>>> how it will affect us much later? When we become aware of something, we
>>> question its meaning and once something is questioned, we never gain a
>>> sense
>>> of its absolute meaning Only that which remains in the subconscious we do
>>> not question. The feelings that well up from our subconscious, in
>>> reaction
>>> to various things, seems to be true absolutely. Our feelings strongly
>>> affect
>>> our train of thought.
>>>
>>>    The certainty of the uninformed is typically replaced by the
>>> wonderment
>>> of the “enlightened”.
>>>
>>>    Our culture/language supplies us with a sense of knowing the meaning
>>> of
>>> all things for which we have a name. This sense of the meaning of things
>>> helps us to feel secure in the face of an uncertain, threatening world.
>>> We
>>> gain that sense of knowing the meaning of things simply be having words
>>> for
>>> things. Our subconscious accepts the affects of the sound of the words as
>>> being the affects of the things to which the words refer.  The words
>>> stand
>>> for the things we name with them and replace, subliminally, our
>>> perception
>>> of the things referred to with our perception  of the words themselves.
>>> The
>>> words are all we have to go on for the sensing of the meaning/effect of
>>> the
>>> things.
>>>
>>>    Having words inform us of the meanings/effects of things seems to have
>>> some advantages compared to being informed of the meanings/effects of
>>> things
>>> by direct perception of the things themselves.  All those who use a
>>> particular language have the same basic subliminal sense of the meanings
>>> of
>>> named things and consequently, are able to participate in the group
>>> dynamic
>>> of their society. The words for things stay constant through time while
>>> how
>>> we are affected directly by things changes. We can share experience,
>>> knowledge and wisdom with words. Without words, our own personal
>>> experience
>>> would be all we would have and we would not be able to share it. Words
>>> enable abstract thought and planning.
>>>
>>>    We think, influenced by the feelings of the sounds of words for things
>>> and feel as though we were thinking with the perception of the things
>>> themselves.
>>>
>>>    Are we conscious that we are affected by the sounds we make with our
>>> voice? We are commonly aware that the quality of singers voices affects
>>> us.
>>> We know that great orators and actors affect us with their delivery and
>>> vocal character. Everyone’s voice affects us. We are aware of the affect
>>> of
>>> tone of voice but not of the affect of articulated phonemes per se.
>>>
>>>    When we utter vocal sounds that are simply sounds and not words, we
>>> may, more easily,  experience consciously, the effects of the sounds,
>>> than
>>> when we speak words. When we speak words, we typically experience
>>> consciously the referential function of the words and not the affects on
>>> us
>>> of the sounds of the words, while we experience the effects of the vocal
>>> sounds of words subliminally. Because we experience the one thing, (the
>>> referential meanings of the words), consciously, and the other thing,
>>> (the
>>> affects on us of the sounds), subconsciously, we
>>>                                                    12
>>>
>>> subconsciously interpret the subliminal effects of the vocal sounds as
>>> being the effects of the things to which the words refer. The
>>> subconscious
>>> mind supplies us with the bottom line of the meaning of whatever it is we
>>> are considering because we cannot reason with the subconscious mind and
>>> we
>>> can with the conscious mind. Whatever we are conscious of, we can
>>> question
>>> and whatever we question becomes uncertain. However we have a
>>> language-based
>>> subconscious reaction to that which the (meaning-of)/(effect-on-us) is
>>> consciously unknown as long as we have a word for it, and that
>>> subconscious
>>> reaction creates an experience of and hence a sense of knowing the
>>> meaning
>>> of that which, prior to being named, did not seem to be known. The word,
>>> made of sounds of our body, stands in for the unknown thing, the thing
>>> separate from our body. In the absence of any objective sense of the
>>> meanings of things, we rely on our words to provide us with a sense of
>>> knowing,
>>>  because knowing relieves us of the stress of anxiety. We are driven into
>>> the perceived safety of our familiar culture, as represented in our
>>> language, by the stress of the fear generated by not knowing. One must be
>>> willing to accept the mystery of existence in order to experience, free
>>> from
>>> the bias of existing culture.
>>>
>>>    Considering words to be things in and of themselves, (sounds), and not
>>> only a means to refer to things, will enable us to examine them for their
>>> inherent meaning. The primary meaning of a word is not the thing which it
>>> represents. It is, rather, the affects on us of it’s sounds. We
>>> consciously
>>> consider the meaning of the word to be the thing to which the word refers
>>> and we subconsciously experience the meaning of the word as the effects
>>> on
>>> us of its sounds. Because we experience, profoundly and consistently, the
>>> effects on us of our human vocal sounds while we experience less
>>> intimately
>>> and less consistently the effects on us of the things to which we refer
>>> with
>>> words, the emotional effects of the words as sounds overrides the
>>> emotional
>>> effects of the things named, and informs us of the nature of named
>>> things.
>>>
>>>    In a similar way that explorers laid claim to land in the name of the
>>> monarch, we tend to lay claim to that which we name in order to render it
>>> seemingly familiar and known.
>>>
>>>    Everything that we perceive subconsciously creates an emotional
>>> reaction that may be experienced consciously and everything that we
>>> perceive
>>> consciously affects us subconsciously as well. We consciously perceive
>>> the
>>> sounds of spoken language and we are also affected subconsciously by
>>> those
>>> same sounds. In the course of verbal communication, we think of the
>>> things
>>> to which our words refer while subconsciously we are emotionally affected
>>> by
>>> the sounds of our words. This simultaneous occurrence of the thought of a
>>> thing and the subconscious experience of the emotion generated by the
>>> sound
>>> of the word we use to refer to that thing, subliminally informs us of the
>>> affect-on-us ,(the-meaning-of), the thing. In this way, we acquire a
>>> sense
>>> of the affects-on-us, (the-meanings-of), everything for which we have a
>>> word. This is important because our actions in relation to the things
>>> that
>>> make up our world are motivated by our perceptions of the meanings of
>>>  those things. Therefore, if we would change, for the better, our
>>> societies’ behavior, we ought to change our languages.
>>>    Since spoken language is crucial in determining the course of human
>>> events, it would be
>>>                                                    13
>>>
>>> better if we consciously agreed with the subliminal sense of the meanings
>>> of things which is instilled in us by our language.
>>>
>>>    We humans are not doing so well with our relationships with one
>>> another
>>> that we should be complacent regarding the improvement of our culture.
>>>
>>>    People have been attempting to address social and economic challenges
>>> ever since there were people. All the religions were attempts to provide
>>> a
>>> basis for our behavior. Marxism was/is an attempt to remedy social and
>>> economic inequality and exploitation. “Hippie” communes were typically
>>> instituted to provide healthy social environments. Organized politics and
>>> codified legal systems were/are created, supposedly, to improve our
>>> condition. Why is it unclear whether any of these deliberate social
>>> structures actually made/make our situation better or worse? Could it be
>>> that the cause of our malaise is something that is not being recognized
>>> by
>>> those who strive to improve our lot? For how many years, for how many
>>> centuries and millennium will we try to fix our broken world by creating
>>> laws, religions, political and economic institutions before we decide
>>> that
>>> doing so does not deal with the source of the problem? Marx’s mistake was
>>> believing that
>>>  economics is the foundation upon which all of society’s other
>>> institutions
>>> are based. It seemed reasonable to him that since life is based upon the
>>> biological economics of survival, that economics must be the determining
>>> force in society. He did not see that our culture provides us with a
>>> sense
>>> of the meaning of all recognized things thereby assuaging the fear/terror
>>> that naturally arises as a result of our consciousness of our physical
>>> vulnerability and that we tend to protect and defend that culture because
>>> of
>>> the perceived security which it provides. Once culture is established, it
>>> causes the economic and social relationships to be what they are, and
>>> they
>>> cannot be lastingly changed without changing the culture.
>>>
>>>    The culture, created by language forms our values which then strongly
>>> influence the decisions we make consciously and  subconsciously.
>>>
>>>                                                             What is
>>> culture?
>>>
>>>    I define culture as the common fundamental values held by the members
>>> of a society. These values derive from our perception of the meanings of,
>>> (the affects on us of), the things that make up our world. “Things” are
>>> whatever we identify as being distinguishable from other things, which
>>> include feelings, thoughts, values, people and ideals. The meanings of
>>> things are one with and the same as the affects on us of those things.
>>> How
>>> do we acquire our sense of, (the affects on us of)/(the meanings of),
>>> things? Is it from our own individual experiences with things? Is it from
>>> what we say to ourselves and to each other about things? If it were based
>>> on
>>> individual experience, how would we achieve consensus and if we could,
>>> why
>>> would all cultures not be pretty much the same?
>>>
>>>    Most would hold that even within a given society our individual values
>>> are not the same and
>>>                                                    14
>>>
>>> surely the popular view of what our values are, indicated by a cursory
>>> survey of our behavior, seems to support that conclusion. When attempting
>>> to
>>> assess the values that underlie behavior we should consider the influence
>>> of
>>> the role that each individual sees themselves as playing within their
>>> culture. Given the same subliminal, fundamental values, individuals
>>> within
>>> any society tend to behave not only relative to those basic values but
>>> also
>>> relative to how they perceive themselves, (who they perceive themselves
>>> to
>>> be), within their society.
>>>
>>>    It seems that the cause of the problem of why we do so many seemingly
>>> destructive and self-defeating things must be so basic, so fundamental as
>>> to
>>> escape our awareness. It must be housed in the subconscious mind since
>>> all
>>> our attempts to address it have been futile. It is that which we don’t
>>> consciously know that we subconsciously know that sometimes makes us
>>> wonder
>>> why we do what we do. Our emotional reactions are influenced by that
>>> which
>>> resides in the subconscious just as they are by that of which we are
>>> conscious, and often, we create rationales to explain our behavior, while
>>> the actual reasons for the feelings that motivate us may be other than
>>> what
>>> we choose to think.
>>>
>>>    What does every cultural group share within itself that affects its
>>> members profoundly and without their conscious knowledge? Where are the
>>> hidden rules, by which we live, to be found? Our culture is an artifact,
>>> inherited from distant ancestors, formed in an environment vastly
>>> different
>>> than today. Ways of interacting with one another that may have seemed to
>>> work then now appear to be dysfunctional. The primary example is war,
>>> which
>>> before weapons of mutual destruction, was rationalizable by the victors.
>>> But
>>> now, with nuclear weapons, would there be any victors? We still think as
>>> we
>>> did then but we cannot afford to act today as we may have believed we
>>> could
>>> then. Our technology has evolved tremendously but our culture has not. We
>>> are ill-equipped to cope with the situation our technology has enabled us
>>> to
>>> create. Furthermore, even if war seemed winnable, wouldn’t we prefer
>>> peace?
>>>
>>>    If we admit that vocal sounds inherently affect us, as do facial
>>> expressions and general body posture, then we may ask how our sense of
>>> the
>>> meaning of the things which make up our world is affected by using
>>> inherently meaningful symbols to refer to them. What is the relative
>>> strength of the emotional effects upon us of our symbols compared to the
>>> emotional effects of the things to which they refer? Considering that the
>>> emotional effects of the things themselves vary with context and is
>>> peculiar
>>> of each of us, and that the emotional effects of the vocal symbols is
>>> relatively consistent and universal, can we assume that the meanings of
>>> the
>>> symbols create the perceived meanings of the things? Is this relationship
>>> the same or different within the conscious and subconscious minds? Does
>>> our
>>> conscious or subconscious mind more strongly influence our behavior? Are
>>> our
>>> behaviors affected by our subconscious minds even when we are trying to
>>> do
>>> what we
>>>  consciously think we should do?
>>>
>>>    We either are or are not affected by our vocal utterances. I see that
>>> we are. If we were not affected by our vocal utterances, we would not
>>> vocalize. The whole purpose of vocalizing is
>>>                                                    15
>>>
>>> communication! And in order to communicate, we must be affected by that
>>> which we use to communicate.
>>>
>>>    What, we may ask, is communicated by vocalizing? What is communicated
>>> when other animals vocalize? It is clear that animals communicate their
>>> instantaneous emotional states by their vocalizations. How is this
>>> communication accomplished? The vibrating of the body of the vocalizer,
>>> (sender),  causes the body of the receiver to vibrate in sympathy. The
>>> receiver experiences the motions and consequently the emotions of the
>>> sender. This simple process is the foundation of our vocal activity, our
>>> verbal activity, (our language), and our culture. Many of us seem to balk
>>> at
>>> accepting the idea that our lofty retorical proclamations are founded
>>> upon
>>> such primal processes. If you are one of these, consider that our genetic
>>> blueprint is shared, in the majority, by all other vertebrates and
>>> largely
>>> by all other animals. To those who disparage animals, please be reminded
>>> that the Grand Creator authored ALL of everything, not only us and those
>>> of
>>> whom we
>>>  approve.
>>>
>>>    What are the ingredients that make up the mix of influences that
>>> determine human behavior? Given that we are intelligent enough to
>>> appreciate
>>> and cherish the truths that are our guiding principles, and given that we
>>> are not born self destructive, then for what reason/s did we act as we
>>> have?
>>> From where does the false information come that motivates much of our
>>> behavior? “Human nature” does not account for our inhuman actions. The
>>> cause
>>> of our destructiveness must exist among the things which we learn.
>>>
>>>     From what ultimate source do we acquire our information regarding the
>>> meaning of our world? Our culture is that source.
>>>
>>>    What have we got to go on in order to achieve a sense of the meaning
>>> of
>>> our world other than the words we speak?
>>>
>>>    Do we have a benchmark for establishing the meaning of things?  If
>>> everything is relative, what is it relative to? We need not look further
>>> than ourselves to find that. How could it be otherwise? We look out from
>>> our
>>> eyes and hear with our ears and think that we can objectively determine
>>> the
>>> nature of each and every thing that we examine. However, with our
>>> survival
>>> in the balance, as it inescapably is, how whatever it is that we examine
>>> relates to our survival determines what it must mean to us. How we are
>>> affected by the things that constitute our world establishes their
>>> meaning.
>>> The vocal sounds we make express and convey the different emotional
>>> effects
>>> we experience. Our words are made up of these body-sounds. Therefore, our
>>> words convey emotional meaning and inform us of the affects on us of
>>> things
>>> for which we have names.
>>>
>>>    Language exists in both the conscious and the subconscious. We are
>>> conscious of the words we speak and of the things to which they refer,
>>> while
>>> they inform us subconsciously of the effects on us, (the meanings of),
>>> those
>>> things to which they refer.
>>>    Does it matter what things mean? Does it matter what we think they
>>> mean? Do our actions
>>>                                                    16
>>>
>>> relative to them depend on what they mean to us?  Do we act in relation
>>> to
>>> things according to what they mean to us? How do we know the ultimate
>>> effect
>>> on us of any thing? Is the effect on us of any thing its meaning? How can
>>> any thing mean to us anything other than what its effect on us is? How do
>>> we
>>> obtain a sense of the meanings of things? Do we get that sense of the
>>> affects-on-us/ the-meanings-of things directly from our own experience
>>> with
>>> things or as mediated by language?
>>>
>>>    Of all forms of body language, (vocalization, facial expression and
>>> overall body posture), only one of them,vocalization, is commonly used to
>>> represent things other than conditions of the emotional body. Our general
>>> posture is very communicative of our physical-emotional state without our
>>> deliberate intent and is sometimes used deliberately to convey the same.
>>> Facial expression can be more finely communicative of our state of
>>> being/feeling than is general body posture. Vocalization, while being
>>> profoundly expressive/communicative, is, by civilized people, ordinarily
>>> exclusively reserved for uttering words. While we are not aware of the
>>> affect upon ourselves of the phones we utter, we are aware of the effect
>>> upon ourselves of the emotional embellishments we add to them. Often, we
>>> consciously add emotional content to our words in order to embellish
>>> their
>>> referential meaning. Since we are busy, often consciously, processing the
>>> referential meaning of
>>>  our words, we are unaware of the emotional impact of the sounds that
>>> make
>>> them up. Each distinct articulate vocal sound affects us in its own
>>> unique
>>> way. Understanding this is crucial to understanding the workings of the
>>> culture-creating function of language.
>>>
>>>    We not only refer to things with our words. More profoundly, we inform
>>> ourselves of the very meaning of those things simply by using a word, (a
>>> vocal sound), to refer to them.  This information as to the affects upon
>>> us,
>>> (the meanings of), the things which make up our world, constitutes our
>>> culture. Culture is information, (in-formation). Since we are not aware
>>> of
>>> the nature of this information, it exists in our subconscious minds. We
>>> act
>>> according to a subconscious program put in place by our language. If we
>>> understand how we receive information regarding the meaning or our world,
>>> we
>>> can change that information so that it agrees with what we believe to be
>>> the
>>> nature of our world. Our culture was passed down, from long ago; from
>>> before
>>> electronics, before motorized transport and the printing press. If we
>>> were
>>> to deliberately create our language today, would we create the one we
>>> currently use? If so or if not, why? Would we know how to create a
>>>  language that conveys the meanings of things that are their actual
>>> meanings? If we would know, how would we know? If not, why not?
>>>
>>>    That which affects us profoundly and constantly must be in close
>>> proximity. Things right in front of us are often overlooked when we
>>> search
>>> for that which affects us powerfully. We tend to assume that if the
>>> causes
>>> of major difficulties were so close to us, it would be obvious and we
>>> would
>>> have discovered them by now. Let us reexamine our major influences  to
>>> look
>>> for what causes us to behave as we do.
>>>
>>>    Our species, is plenty smart enough to understand why our saints and
>>> prophets are correct when they exhort us to be “good”.  We create secular
>>> laws that mirror our religious tenants and are
>>>                                                    17
>>>
>>> sensitive to any critique of our behavior. Our feelings of guilt seem to
>>> be
>>> well developed. Why then do we act as we do; making war against one
>>> another
>>> and engaging in all kinds of destructive activity?
>>>
>>>    I have heard many claim that it is simply “human nature” to act in
>>> destructive ways. Those who believe that, feel that there is nothing to
>>> be
>>> done to correct our human malaise other than punishment. Evil ones must
>>> be
>>> trimmed back, like a noxious and thorny vine. I do not subscribe to that
>>> depressing idea and know that the truth of the matter is that we humans
>>> are
>>> inherently survival oriented and will learn whatever seems as though it
>>> will
>>> further our survival. It is because of our native intelligence coupled
>>> with
>>> our survival desire that we voluntarily stretch our consciousness in
>>> order
>>> to glimpse a better way for ourselves to carry on.
>>>
>>>    What are the forces that influence our behavior? What we believe to be
>>> good and correct does not, it seems, by itself, determine our actions. Do
>>> we
>>> not fully believe that what seems to be right to us is truly right? Or is
>>> there some other influence that informs us of what the world and all the
>>> things and concepts and people in it mean to us, something else that
>>> influences our perception of how we must behave in order to survive?
>>>
>>>    Our behavior is related to how we are affected by the things that make
>>> up our world. We behave in relation to the various things that fill our
>>> awareness, according to how they affect our survivability, (how we
>>> PERCEIVE
>>> that they affect our survivability). We perceive the world directly
>>> through
>>> personal contact with it and indirectly through contact with that which
>>> represents the world to us, (our language). Language represents the world
>>> by
>>> labeling everything about which we speak, with sounds made by our bodies.
>>> Those vocal sounds are part and parcel of states of our emotions. Our
>>> preverbal progenitors and our children when young, make vocal sounds in
>>> reaction to various environmental stimuli. Those emotive sounds are
>>> intuitively made sense of by all who hear them. We sense the
>>> vocalizations
>>> and they make sense to us. The vocal sounds are made by a body in an
>>> emotional state and cause that state to be reproduced in the emotional
>>> body
>>> of the hearer
>>>  of those sounds. The sending body vibrates and the receiving body
>>> vibrates
>>> similarly. An emotionally linked vibrational pattern is spread from the
>>> originator of the vocal sound-vibration to whoever’s auditory apparatus
>>> is
>>> moved by it. The transmittance of the vibrational pattern is the
>>> transmission of the emotion. We are emotionally affected by the emotions
>>> of
>>> others.
>>>
>>>    Language is an institution, a standardized way we move our bodies,
>>> specifically our vocal apparatuses, our ears, central nervous system and
>>> emotions, in relation to the various things that make up our world. In
>>> relation to a book, we who speak English, utter the sound, “book”. In
>>> relation to a book, a Spanish-speaking person utters the sound, “ libro”.
>>> These two different sounds move us in different ways, giving us a
>>> different
>>> experience of that which refers to and represents that object and
>>> consequently, of the thing referred to. The primal meaning of a word is
>>> the
>>> effect the sound of it creates within us. The secondary, more distant
>>> meaning of a word is that to which it refers. The secondary meaning is
>>> what
>>> we commonly accept as being the one and only meaning. We are
>>>                                                    18
>>>
>>> generally not aware of the primary meaning, because we are affected by
>>> the
>>> vocal sounds of our words subliminally and by the secondary, referential,
>>> meaning of words consciously.  Awareness of the primary meanings of vocal
>>> sounds was superseded by the awareness of the secondary, -referential-,
>>> meaning of vocal sounds used as words.
>>>
>>>    To understand the functionality, the “nuts and bolts”, of language, is
>>> to free ourselves of domination by culture, to be the masters of culture
>>> rather than its subjects. We have been inextricably attached to culture,
>>> for
>>> better or for worse, ever since our use of language began. Now we can
>>> intentionally create a language/culture that informs us as we would like
>>> to
>>> be informed, of the effects on us, (the meanings of), all the things we
>>> name.
>>>
>>>    Certainly we agree that we are affected by the sounds we utter. What
>>> then is the
>>> consequence of referring to all the things to which we refer, (all the
>>> things that make up our conscious world), with inherently meaningful
>>> sounds?
>>> If we were able to refer to things with “meaningless” symbols, then all
>>> we
>>> would be conveying is the thought of the thing. When we refer to things
>>> with
>>> inherently meaningful symbols, we are also informing ourselves of the
>>> meanings of the things to which we are referring. Is there such a thing
>>> as a
>>> meaningless symbol? Is anything meaningless? In order to perceive
>>> anything,
>>> including a symbol, that symbol must register upon our senses and in
>>> order
>>> to register upon our senses, the sensed thing must affect us. No effect
>>> on
>>> us, equals no perception by us. Whatever the affect on us is, is the
>>> fundamental meaning of the sensed thing. When we refer to things, we are
>>> primarily being affected by the symbol which we use to do the referring
>>> and
>>> secondarily by the memory, if there is a memory, of the thing to which we
>>>  are referring. When we refer to something with which we have no direct
>>> experience, we have only the symbol, (word), to affect us and thus to
>>> inform
>>> us.
>>>
>>>    If there is a discrete connection between a vocal sound and  a thing,
>>> and a connection likewise between a particular vocal sound and a specific
>>> effect on the emotions, then there is a connection between the effect on
>>> us
>>> of the sound and the thing to which that sound, (word), refers.
>>>
>>>    We are aware that sound has an effect and that the word is sound and
>>> that the word has an effect and that the word refers to a thing. Are we
>>> aware that, for all intents and purposes, the effect seems to be the
>>> thing.
>>> How we are affected by a thing, our perception of a thing, is accepted
>>> subliminally as being the meaning of the thing. Our actions relative to
>>> the
>>> things in our world, are related to the perceived meanings of those
>>> things.
>>>
>>>    We feel the feelings generated by the sounds of our words at the same
>>> time as we are deliberately focusing on the things to which the words
>>> refer.
>>> As a consequence, we associate particular vocal-sound-generated feelings
>>> with particular things. The thing does not define the feeling. Rather,
>>> the
>>> feeling defines the thing. The feeling of the word determines what is
>>> accepted subliminally as the meaning of the thing. The word enables us to
>>> experience feelings of the meanings of things not present, and unknown by
>>> direct experience. It establishes a sense of
>>>                                                    19
>>>
>>> consensus which wells up from the subconscious minds among the speakers
>>> of
>>> a given language.
>>>
>>>    All throughout human history, language has been playing this role of
>>> consensus creator based on the information we derive from the sounds of
>>> our
>>> words regarding the-affects-on-us/the-meanings-of, the things that make
>>> up
>>> our worlds. If we would rather live in a culture of our own creation than
>>> in
>>> just any one in which we happened to be born, we might consider
>>> experimenting with cultural change through language renewal.
>>>
>>>    I have been asked what I hope to achieve with this information. My
>>> desire is that we become aware of the forces that affect us so that we
>>> may
>>> be able to change the circumstances that exist to circumstances that we
>>> would prefer.
>>>
>>>    Because of the inherent shortcomings inherent in existing languages,
>>> although words can be used in a kindly manner to help get us back on
>>> track
>>> when we lose our way, they cannot, in and of themselves, guide anyone who
>>> is
>>> determined to see things in a certain way. Only the willing can be
>>> helped.
>>> How can we help people to be willing?
>>>
>>>    I observe that culture is the prosthetic subconscious of society, that
>>> which we who live in a particular society share with one another and have
>>> in
>>> common. It has to do with our world-view. Our world view is formed by
>>> what
>>> things mean to us. How do we obtain our sense of the meaning of our
>>> world?
>>> Do we share that sense with the others in our group or is it individual
>>> to
>>> each of us? Is it a conscious, subconscious or unconscious sense, or more
>>> than one of them?
>>>
>>>    When I discovered that the sounds of words convey a sense of meaning,
>>> I
>>> realized that I had found the answers to these questions. We are informed
>>> subliminally of the meaning of our world by the language that we speak.
>>>
>>>    Having words inform us of the meanings/effects of things seems to have
>>> some advantages compared to being informed of the meanings/effects of
>>> things
>>> by direct perception of the things themselves.  All those who use a
>>> particular language have the same basic subliminal sense of the meanings
>>> of
>>> named things and consequently, are able to participate in the group
>>> dynamic
>>> of their society. The words for things stay constant through time while
>>> how
>>> we are affected directly by things changes. We can share experience,
>>> knowledge and wisdom with words. Without words, our own personal
>>> experience
>>> would be all we would have and we would not be able to share it. Words
>>> enable abstract thought and planning.
>>>
>>>    We think, influenced by the feelings of the sounds of words for things
>>> and feel as though we were thinking with the perception of the things
>>> themselves.
>>>
>>>    Are we conscious that we are affected by the sounds we make with our
>>> voice? We are commonly aware that the quality of singers voices affects
>>> us.
>>> We know that great orators and actors
>>>                                                    20
>>>
>>> affect us with their delivery and vocal character. Everyone’s voice
>>> affects
>>> us. We are aware of the affect of tone of voice but not of the affect of
>>> articulated phonemes per se.
>>>
>>>    When we make word-free sounds with our voice, we more readily
>>> experience the effects of those sounds than when we utter words. We
>>> generally do not sense the effects of those sounds when we verbalize
>>> because
>>> our attention is redirected from the affects on us of the vocal sounds to
>>> comprehending what the words represent. The primary affects upon us of
>>> the
>>> sounds of our words remain, on a subliminal level, when we use our vocal
>>> sounds as words. Using the sounds as words directs our attention to the
>>> things to which the words refer. We are affected by sounds of our words
>>> whether we make them simply as vocal sounds or as words.
>>>
>>>
>>>                How We Are Affected By Our Culture
>>>                          And How We Can Change It?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    The behavioral choices we make, be they deliberately or subliminally
>>> driven. are informed by our perception of ourselves in context to our
>>> perception of the world, -by the affects on us of the things that make up
>>> our world. We achieve a sense of how we are affected by the world more as
>>> a
>>> result of our language than as a result of our own nonlinguistic
>>> experience.
>>> Is that sense due to the actual firsthand effect of things on each of us
>>> individually? How do-we/can- we know what the ultimate effect of anything
>>> is
>>> upon us, either as an individual or as a society? Do we even know the
>>> meaning of life? How can we know the ultimate effect on us of anything if
>>> we
>>> do not know the purpose/goal of life? A particular way we are affected is
>>> either desirable or not, as that effect relates to that large purpose,
>>> and
>>> who among us knows that purpose and is able to show others, by proof,
>>> what
>>> it is? We seem to share, with other “reasonable” people, what we think
>>>  is a commonsense view of life, but there is so much room for different
>>> choices. On what basis do we make our choices?
>>>
>>>    In the vacuum created by the questioning mind, we have only our
>>> conventional wisdom, residing subliminally, as represented by our
>>> culture,
>>> to inform us. The more we question, the more we realize that we do not
>>> know.
>>> How can we act not knowing what things mean? We must have something to go
>>> on, a given, on which to base our choices. That given is our language.
>>> The
>>> sounds we use to refer to the various things we refer vocally to, seem to
>>> enable us to experience a feeling of the effect/meaning of the named
>>> things.
>>> We have nothing else to rely on, as individuals and more-so as a group,
>>> since our common language provides us with a common frame of reference.
>>>
>>>    Vocal sounds themselves, whether they are within words or simply as
>>> sounds, are richly meaningful in the sense that they affect our emotional
>>> state. Vocalizing communicates states of our organism. Each particular
>>> vocal
>>> sound communicates/conveys a particular state. When we use
>>>                                                    21
>>>
>>> these vocal sounds, each with its own effect/meaning, to refer to
>>> particular things, as we do when we speak with words, we bestow meaning
>>> upon
>>> the things to which we vocally refer, things that we would otherwise not
>>> perceive as we do if not for their names. The sounds of our language are
>>> by,
>>> for and of our body/emotions/feelings, while the things we name are
>>> relatively removed from our immediate experience. Naming things seems to
>>> render them understandable. This sense of knowing is created by
>>> associating
>>> our familiar body-made vocal sounds with them.
>>>
>>>    The perceived meaning-strength of our verbal utterances is greater
>>> than
>>> the perceived meaning-strength of the things named by them and thus, the
>>> affect on us of the sounds of our words pushes aside and replaces the
>>> affects on us of the things themselves. The symbol not only represents
>>> the
>>> symbolized in  our consciousness, more profoundly, the effect of the
>>> symbol,
>>> (in this case, the word),  on us subliminally, takes the place of the
>>> effect
>>> on us of the symbolized: the map replaces the territory. As we are beings
>>> who manipulate symbols to gain understanding, we live in a world of our
>>> own
>>> making, not because of deliberate design, but rather by the nature of
>>> language/culture.
>>>
>>>    In a world prior to the proliferation of technology, using language
>>> enhanced our survivability. However, in a world in which we are
>>> surrounded
>>> by the results of our own efforts, (our artifacts), as we are now, our
>>> language/culture may be a major cause of our difficulties. Culture is a
>>> living artifact, representing the mentality of our ancestors and
>>> instilling
>>> that mentality, (that world-view), in us.
>>>
>>>    I believe that once we understand the mechanism of culture, we will
>>> choose to create culture deliberately.
>>>
>>>    Some say that existing culture is natural and that to tinker with it
>>> would be risky and probably harmful. I say that we cannot afford to fear
>>> to
>>> experiment with new ways of seeing our world. After all, we are not in
>>> such
>>> a favorable position relative to our prognosis for survival as a species,
>>> -precisely because of the effect on us of our culture-, that we should
>>> adopt
>>> a passive attitude regarding our culture. “If we do not change our
>>> direction
>>> we will end up where we are headed.”
>>>
>>>    The meaning of any thing is the same as its affect on us and its
>>> affect
>>> on us is its meaning. It is the effect of a thing that we perceive and
>>> that
>>> perceiving informs us of the existence of the thing. It is only that
>>> which
>>> affects us that we perceive, and it is that effect on us that is its
>>> meaning. It defies logic and experience to hold that we are unaffected by
>>> our vocal sounds, either used as words or not. If we accept the premise
>>> that
>>> we are affected by our vocal sounds, that our vocal sounds communicate,
>>> we
>>> might ask ourselves what the affects upon us of those sounds are.
>>>
>>>     The sounds of words do not cease to be things themselves, when they
>>> are used in words to represent other things. On the scale of the
>>> evolution
>>> of the human species, the use of vocal sounds to represent things is a
>>> relatively recent development. Prior to that, our forbears’ vocalizing
>>> simply expressed immediate body-mind states.
>>>                                                    22
>>>
>>>    We are affected subconsciously by the sound/sounds of any given word
>>> in
>>> the same way as our forbears were affected by the things that now the
>>> word
>>> represents. They reacted to  things: the vocal part of that reaction
>>> later
>>> became  words and we who use/hear those words, react to the sounds of
>>> those
>>> words as they reacted to those things. Experiencing the word replaces
>>> experiencing the thing the word represents. Culture is instilled in us in
>>> that way. The word acts as a transmitter of experience. The experience
>>> that
>>> caused the sounds to be uttered is represented in those who hear those
>>> sounds/words subsequently. By this means, our forbears’ experience of
>>> things
>>> becomes our experience of those things.
>>>
>>>    Thus, we are at once, informed and defined by our language/culture.
>>> Our
>>> culture is the real status quo, the actual law of the land. It rules us
>>> from
>>> our subconscious minds, beyond the reach of our deliberative processes.
>>> Since we cannot, in the final analysis, prove anything at all, it is by
>>> default that the values, the unquestioned assumptions, which reside in
>>> the
>>> subconscious mind, form our foundation.
>>>
>>>    Furthermore, while our own experiences are unique to each of us, it is
>>> our culturally/ linguistically created experiences that we share as a
>>> group.
>>> To be a part of the group, one must adopt the group’s consensus
>>> experience
>>> as one’s own. To be conventionally understood, one must speak the mother
>>> tongue.
>>>
>>>    Similar to an iceberg. the preponderance of the import of language
>>> occurs beneath the surface of awareness. One must consider the role of
>>> the
>>> subconscious mind in order to grasp the true function of language.
>>> Language
>>> is based on sound, sound made with the human voice. The sounds we produce
>>> vocally communicate our emotional conditions.
>>>
>>> When we vibrate that part of our body, specifically evolved as a
>>> vibration-making apparatus, (their vocal apparatuses), we show others
>>> what
>>> is going on with us, we cause others specialized vibration-receiving body
>>> parts, (the auditory apparatus), to vibrate in kind. The motion of the
>>> auditory apparatus mimics the motion of the vocal apparatus. After being
>>> vibrated by an other’s voice, we are able to reproduce those vocal
>>> sounds.
>>>
>>>    When we hear someone speak, at the same time that we are trying to
>>> understand what is being said, (what is meant by any particular words),
>>> our
>>> emotions/feelings are being informed by the effects on us of the sounds
>>> of
>>> the words we hear. We do not need to consciously try to apprehend the
>>> meanings/ effects of the vocal sounds themselves to perceive them. The
>>> meanings are the affects on us of the sounds. We do need to consciously
>>> try
>>> to understand the meanings/referential functions, of the words. Because
>>> of
>>> that, the focus of our conscious attention is removed from the effect of
>>> our
>>> vocal sounds and placed upon the relationship between the words and the
>>> things they signify. That type of meaning is peculiar to each language
>>> and
>>> is not necessarily intuitive unless one has adopted the world-view of
>>> that
>>> language.
>>>
>>>                                                    23
>>>
>>>    As for the demand that the claim that vocal sounds are communicative,
>>> be proven; there is not a demand for proof that facial expression and
>>> body
>>> posture in general are communicative. Why does no one dispute the second
>>> claim while  establishment linguists deny that vocal sounds convey
>>> meaning?
>>> Is it because they are so caught up with considerations of the
>>> referential
>>> function of words that they cannot  experience the effects on themselves
>>> of
>>> the sounds that make up the words? Does it not stand to reason that vocal
>>> sounds must affect us? Is it not true that everything that we perceive
>>> affects us and that it is precisely that effect which we perceive? Can
>>> there
>>> be perception without being affected? And the meaning of anything must,
>>> in
>>> the final analysis, be simply its effect within us. Though one may agree
>>> that we are affected by vocal sounds,  one may not agree that we are
>>> affected emotionally by vocal sounds. We are accustomed to not reacting
>>>  emotionally overtly to our vocal sounds.
>>>
>>>    What is language doing to us, that we don’t know about? What do these
>>> sounds that come forth from our bodies mean? What does anything mean? Is
>>> finding what anything means the same as discovering how it affects us? Is
>>> the meaning the same as the emotional/body effect? Could it be anything
>>> other than that? How do we know how anything emotionally affects us? Do
>>> things affect us? Are we emotionally affected by the sounds we produce
>>> vocally? If so, how are we affected? Are we emotionally affected more
>>> strongly by the sounds we vocally produce or by the things in our
>>> environment? Where do emotional reactions come from; the conscious or the
>>> subconscious, or both?
>>>
>>>    Do we obtain a sense of the meaning of a thing from deliberative
>>> thinking about it or from our subconscious reaction to our mental process
>>> regarding it? Emotions well up from the depths of our occult minds. Once
>>> we
>>> become aware of our reactions to a thing, we can question the reason for
>>> the
>>> reaction and reinform ourselves about how the thing affects us. With new
>>> information, our emotional reaction changes. What do the very words we
>>> use
>>> to describe a thing to ourselves do to our sense of the meaning of the
>>> thing? When we compare the thing in question to other things not in
>>> question, we are not really discovering its meaning. We are rather,
>>> assuming
>>> that the meaning of the things we use to clarify the meaning of our
>>> subject,
>>> are themselves clearly meaningful. What if they are not? Is it possible
>>> for
>>> them to be not? The only thing in this scenario of which we do not
>>> question
>>> the meaning is the sounds of the words we use to refer to the things.
>>> And,
>>>  we normally, do not even consider our vocal sounds to be meaningful.
>>> Because their affect on us is through our subconscious, we are not aware
>>> of
>>> it and thus are affected more unalterably than if we were aware of the
>>> fact
>>> that we are being affected by the sounds of our words.
>>>
>>>    Although logically, it is impossible for us to not be affected by our
>>> vocal sounds, we do not dwell on that phenomenon and do not consider it
>>> an
>>> issue of moment. Supposing we are affected by vocal sounds: what would
>>> that
>>> mean? Would our perception of the things we refer to verbally be
>>> influenced?
>>> Would our sense of the meaning of named things be determined by the vocal
>>> sounds we use to refer to those things?
>>>
>>>                                                    24
>>>
>>>    We all talk of culture. What do we mean by “culture”? In the New World
>>> Dictionary of the American Language, the definition number 6 of culture,
>>> is:
>>> ”The ideas, customs, skills, arts, etc. of a given people in a given
>>> period;
>>> civilization.” I define culture as, “The values/assumptions that are
>>> shared
>>> by the users/practitioners  of any given language.”
>>>
>>>    The history of the human race is basically, the record of
>>> intracultural
>>> and intercultural “chemistry”. We have been, for the most part, passive
>>> recipients of whatever paradigm was dealt us by our cultures. Like
>>> passengers on a great ship, our fates were sealed by the course charted
>>> in
>>> advance by the directives mandated by our culture. Wouldn’t we rather be
>>> active participants in shaping our destiny? We can be if we understand
>>> how
>>> culture works. It is a simple and natural phenomena, and although we
>>> created
>>> it, we do not understand it. Until we do, we will be incidental and
>>> directed
>>> actors in a script not of our choosing. Just as understanding our biology
>>> liberates us from the chains of previously immutable law, so too, knowing
>>> what culture is and consequently, how to alter it, will free us from the
>>> destiny of carrying out the plan set in motion by the emergence of
>>> language/culture.
>>>
>>>    We will invest in becoming aware of our culture when we realize the
>>> necessity of
>>> doing so. When we know that we cannot go on indefinitely with our current
>>> flight plan, unaware, on autopilot, we will look for a new understanding
>>> of
>>> our human behavior.
>>>
>>>    Through the years, centuries and millennia, our culture has served us
>>> in whatever way it has, for better or for worse. It seems that we now
>>> need
>>> to acknowledge that we are, “up against it”, and that we need to change
>>> our
>>> ways. Before technology and industrialization, we did not feel the heat
>>> of
>>> our cultural impasse nearly as much as we now do. The power to alter our
>>> environment given to us by our technology has brought the issue of our
>>> inappropriate behavior to the forefront. The results of our cultural
>>> inadequacy is right in our faces. However, we have not yet, as a society,
>>> identified the source of our problem. We have not yet realized how we are
>>> possessed by our culture or even what culture is. We sometimes question
>>> why
>>> we act in ways so antithetical to our professed beliefs/values. We go to
>>> church on Sunday and are back in the lurch on Monday. Our saints and
>>> prophets tell us The Truth and we nod our heads in agreement. Yet we
>>> continue to
>>>  behave as we have, in ways characteristic of our culture, not in ways
>>> representative of our professed beliefs and values. This contradiction
>>> and
>>> dissonance between what we believe consciously and what seems to be truly
>>> motivating our behavior is the cause of much confusion and angst. We are
>>> passive recipients of the hands dealt us by our culture not the masters
>>> of
>>> our destiny. Let us become conscious of the nature of the relationship
>>> between ourselves and our culture.
>>>
>>>    How can any of us experience the effect on our emotions of the vocal
>>> sounds we utter/hear? I accomplished that by saying the sounds of our
>>> language, using the alphabet as a sequential guide, and sensitizing
>>> myself
>>> to the emotional effect of each sound in turn.
>>>
>>>                                                    25
>>>
>>>    Our progenitors used to live in whatever shelters, such as caves or
>>> rock overhangs, they
>>> found already existing. Then they learned to make shelters where and when
>>> they wished. We have, until now, lived within and according to whatever
>>> culture in which we happened to be born. We can now attempt to make our
>>> culture one that instills in us the values we consciously hold, rather
>>> than
>>> the values we inherited from our distant ancestors.
>>>
>>>    When I was in school, I was taught that culture is things like
>>> classical music, opera, the fine arts, classic literature and theater. I
>>> sensed that culture was far deeper than that, that culture existed in
>>> each
>>> of us, deeply ingrained in our minds. Not until I discovered the
>>> mechanics
>>> of language did I clearly realize what culture is, what it does to us and
>>> how it does it.
>>>
>>>    Before I discovered how language works, I did not understand what
>>> culture is. The two, language and culture, are identical twins, each with
>>> a
>>> different name and apparent mission but with the same dna. Culture is an
>>> abstraction and language is the physical mechanism from whence it
>>> springs.
>>> Language uses emotionally evocative sounds to represent things, thereby
>>> suggesting the meanings of those things. The sense of the meaning of
>>> things
>>> derived from words, accompanied by our sense of self identity, directs us
>>> as
>>> to how to behave in relation to those things. The values etched in our
>>> culture by language long ago are instilled in us and direct our behavior
>>> today.
>>>
>>>    A body continues in its state of motion unless it is acted on by an
>>> outside force. Human culture remains fundamentally unchanged unless it is
>>> changed by those who sense a need to change it.
>>>
>>>    The subconscious mind is where culture resides within us. Culture
>>> resides without us in language. Culture remains unexamined and unchanged
>>> within the subconscious mind until we see a need to change it. Many
>>> others
>>> have spoken about the need to change the way we, as a society, think:
>>> some
>>> have tried, by using means, such as meditation, sleep deprivation,
>>> psychoactive substances and chanting to accomplish this change and have
>>> been
>>> more or less able to do so for themselves. However, it seems they were
>>> not
>>> able to lastingly infuse society at large with their newly found vision,
>>> due
>>> to not addressing this issue from the root. One must understand a process
>>> before one can intentionally and deliberately alter it. Understanding the
>>> “nuts and bolts” of language makes it possible to change our culture.
>>>
>>>    The idea that we are strongly influenced by a force invisible to us is
>>> strange and tends to be unsettling. The glue that binds us together as a
>>> society is so much an ingrained part of our lives, that we do not
>>> perceive
>>> it as a force. It operates automatically and therefore requires no
>>> attention
>>> in order to function as the organizing premise of society. The question
>>> of
>>> whether we approve of its values almost never arises. Rather, we act as
>>> automatons, driven by the invisible program instilled in us with the
>>> learning of our language. Just as features of our physical bodies evolve
>>> by
>>> natural processes, so culture evolves by natural processes without our
>>> conscious collaboration. Culture has served us tolerably well through
>>> most
>>> of our species’ history. However, since the emergence of
>>>                                                    26
>>>
>>> mechanization, the contradictions between our professed values and our
>>> way
>>> of life have become
>>> increasingly obvious. This is due to the magnifying effect of technology
>>> on
>>> the impact of human actions. What we do today affects our shared
>>> environment
>>> far more than our actions did prior to industrial technology, while our
>>> culture is basically the same as it was then, before industrialization.
>>> This
>>> forces upon us the issue of the correctness of the values that underlie
>>> our
>>> assumptions about the nature of reality. We can no longer afford to forge
>>> ahead with no awareness of the reasons for our choices.
>>>
>>>    The tension caused by the contradiction between our professed beliefs
>>> and the beliefs implied/expressed by our actions is caused by the
>>> isolation
>>> from our conscious apprehension of the source of the values or even of
>>> the
>>> values that drive our actions. Our conscious beliefs derive from our
>>> intellectual workings while our actions are driven by our cultural
>>> conditioning, which resides in our subconscious minds. We all have
>>> different
>>> beliefs, depending on what mental roads we have traveled and we who share
>>> a
>>> given language, all have the same underlying, subliminal values. How we
>>> translate these common values into actions depends on our perception of
>>> what
>>> character we are, in the script of our society. In the script we are born
>>> into, we act the role we see ourselves as plausibly and convincingly
>>> being
>>> able to play. One’s assumed role in society must seem plausible to one
>>> given
>>> one’s assessment of oneself.
>>>
>>>    Our understanding of culture is vastly more incomplete than is our
>>> understanding of mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology or even
>>> psychology
>>> and sociology.  The radio-telescope, electron microscope and other
>>> information gathering tools continue to enable us to conceive of that
>>> which
>>> we previously could grasp only metaphysically. We can likewise increase
>>> our
>>> awareness of the machinations of human culture by focusing our attention
>>> on
>>> it and bringing to bear, in our quest for understanding, whatever
>>> relevant
>>> knowledge we may have. If we widely saw that culture impacts our everyday
>>> life to the extent to which it does, we would feel a powerful motivation
>>> to
>>> discover its inner workings. Language is the body whose physics we must
>>> comprehend in order to understand the workings of culture.
>>>
>>>    The vocal sounds our pre-linguistic progenitors made conveyed feeling
>>> and emotion. We still make sounds and they convey feeling and emotion now
>>> as
>>> they did then. Using them as words, to refer to things, does not cause
>>> them
>>> to cease conveying emotion. The stronger affect on us of the sounds of
>>> words
>>> than the effect on us of the things which words label, the consensus
>>> regarding the meaning of things that words provide members of a group who
>>> speak a common language and a constancy of  the sense of the meanings of
>>> things we name, all contribute to our subconscious acceptance of the
>>> affects
>>> on us of the sounds of words as representing the affects on us of  the
>>> things which words represent. When we use words, we feel we have a sort
>>> of
>>> firsthand experience with the things named. This experience with the
>>> verbal
>>> representation of things named provides us with a sense of their meaning.
>>> The sound, which is rich with emotional affect, by default, informs us
>>>  of the emotion associated with the thing. We associate the sound of a
>>> word
>>> for a thing with the thing; so we associate the effect of the sound as a
>>> thing, with the effect of the thing, for it is
>>>                                                    27
>>>
>>> the effect of a thing and only the effect of a thing that lets us know
>>> that
>>> the thing is there and what it means. We have nothing else common,
>>> constant,
>>> and which affects us more strongly when the named thing itself is not
>>> there
>>> in front of us, and even when it is, than the sounds of words, (the
>>> sounds
>>> of our voice). The affects on us of the sounds of our own voice takes the
>>> place of the affects on us of the things themselves. We make our world
>>> familiar and handleable by using our bodily sounds to represent the
>>> things
>>> we encounter. We intuitively understand the meanings/effects of our vocal
>>> sounds while we do not as readily understand the affects on us of the
>>> things
>>> in our world. Our vocal sounds are of by and for us while the
>>> world-out-there is much less familiar and more difficult to relate to
>>> intuitively.
>>>
>>>    The sounds that a musical instrument makes are a result of the
>>> materials and construction of the instrument. When something vibrates, it
>>> makes sounds according to its physical structure. Whatever is doing the
>>> vibrating is what sounds. Mothers sing sweet lullabies to babies, not
>>> pirate
>>> drinking songs. Why? Because the sounds the mother makes cause the baby
>>> to
>>> vibrate in a similar manner. Entrainment is a word that may be used to
>>> describe this phenomena. There is the driver and the driven. The mother
>>> is
>>> the driver and the baby is the driven. The mother establishes a pattern
>>> of
>>> motion and the baby assumes motion in that pattern. If one wishes to calm
>>> another, one speaks calmly. Elemental states are being
>>> transmitted/communicated by the mother to the baby. Are elemental states
>>> communicated by phonemes? Is there a relationship between the vocal
>>> sounds
>>> we make and our emotive/feeling states? Do our vocal sounds correlate to
>>> our
>>> feelings/emotions?
>>>  Are vocal sounds meaningful? Do they cause an effect in us? As a form of
>>> body language, are vocal sounds meaningful, as facial expressions are
>>> meaningful?
>>>
>>>    All animals that breathe make sounds when they breathe. The air
>>> passing
>>> into and out of the body makes sounds and those sounds are formed and
>>> shaped
>>> by whatever the condition of the body is. Think of The Star Wars
>>> character,
>>> Darth Vader, as he breathes. How communicative is the way he breathes!
>>> One
>>> may ask how does the sound of breathing communicate and what does it
>>> communicate? If simply breathing communicates, then does vocalizing
>>> communicate? Do the sounds that we produce, in order to form our words,
>>> communicate? If they do, then what is it that they communicate? There are
>>> some vocal sounds to which one may feel a reaction, such as the sound of
>>> the
>>> letter, “R”, or that of the “M”, or the “A”, or “E”, etc.. Are any vocal
>>> sounds meaningful to you?
>>>
>>>     Supposing that all the sounds we make communicate; would our feelings
>>> about a thing be affected by what the sounds we use to refer to it
>>> communicate to us? Many linguists and others maintain that the sounds we
>>> make when we speak, in and of themselves, have no meaning. By saying that
>>> they have no meaning one is holding that they do not communicate. But if
>>> Darth Vader’s breathing communicates, which it obviously does, then even
>>> breathing is meaningful, its meaning being the affect it causes in us.
>>> One
>>> may say that the affect on us of the sounds of breathing is an emotional
>>> affect and therefore has no meaning per se. At this point one would be
>>> separating the concept of emotional affect from the concept of meaning.
>>> If
>>> emotional affect is not meaningful, what
>>>                                                    28
>>>
>>> is? One may say that the meanings of words are the things to which they
>>> refer. If this were true, we
>>> would have no clue of the meaning of any thing. We would know what the
>>> sounds of the words mean in terms of the things but we would have no
>>> sense
>>> of what the things mean. We need to know what the things mean: we already
>>> subconsciously know what the sounds of the words mean. And, can a sound
>>> mean
>>> a thing? Or does a sound have meaning of its own? Does the thing have
>>> meaning of its own? It seems likely that vocal sounds have
>>> effects/meanings
>>> and it seems questionable that things have particular meanings. After
>>> all,
>>> it is how any thing affects us that is its meaning. The way a thing
>>> affects
>>> us changes through time and is different for different folks, whereas the
>>> affects on us of the sounds of our own voices is the same through time
>>> and
>>> for all of us. However, if on the other hand, we derive our sense of the
>>> meaning of a thing from the sounds of the word for it, we do have a
>>> definite
>>> sense of its meaning because we are naturally affected emotionally by
>>> those
>>>  sounds.
>>>
>>>     On one hand, we are affected deeply by the sounds made by our bodies
>>> and on the other hand, we are not consistently and uniformly affected by
>>> the
>>> things that make up our world. When the two things are associated with
>>> one
>>> another, the one with the strongest affect-pressure defines the one with
>>> the
>>> lesser affect-pressure.
>>>
>>>    No one that I have spoken with about the subject maintains that the
>>> sounds we make with our voices are non-communicative. Rather, people
>>> commonly report that they feel clearly affected in particular ways by
>>> different vocal sounds and a thread of commonality runs through their
>>> reports. So, if we know that we are affected by our voice sounds, why do
>>> we
>>> deny that  we may be affected by the sounds of our words and that how we
>>> are  affected by the sounds of our words may influence our perceptions of
>>> the things we name?´
>>>
>>>    There are conscious processes and subconscious processes And processes
>>> can migrate from one realm to the other. Driving a car or playing a piano
>>> are examples. When we talk, we are conscious of the things we are talking
>>> about. When we vocalize non-verbally, we are conscious of the sounds of
>>> our
>>> voice and, if we are on the lookout for it, we may be aware of the
>>> effects
>>> on us of those sounds.
>>>
>>>    What we suppose to be the reasons why we act as we do may not be the
>>> real or sole reasons. The quest for psychological self-discovery is about
>>> becoming aware of the real reasons for our behavior. Many of us use our
>>> rational minds to create plausible explanations for our behavior. Some of
>>> us
>>> who are more dedicated to the truth of the matter rather than to simply
>>> defending whatever we may do, use the rational mind to examine our
>>> behavior
>>> in the light of understanding. In the ultimate shakedown, do we really
>>> know
>>> why we do what we do? Can we prove it to anyone else: can we prove it to
>>> ourselves? Looking at what influences us seems to be useful in
>>> ascertaining
>>> exactly what motivates us. Since we are all about survival, whatever
>>> affects
>>> our survivability, obviously affects our behavior. Our relationship with
>>> our
>>> caregivers, if we are dependent on another, with our employer, if we are
>>> working for someone else, with the legal
>>>                                                    29
>>>
>>> structures, if we live in civilization, with our perception of the affect
>>> on us of our actions, whether that
>>> perception is conscious or subconscious, and with our sense of morality,
>>> if
>>> we are so disposed, are all important to us. Whatever bears on our
>>>  survival
>>> and metasurvival influences our behavior.
>>>
>>>    How do we ascertain the affects on us, (the meanings of), the myriad
>>> of
>>> things that make up our world? It is impossible to think our way through
>>> the
>>> question of how we will be affected by all the various choices we may
>>> make,
>>> as a chess player attempts to do. We would need to know the ultimate
>>> affect
>>> on us of all things and all actions relative to those things. This is not
>>> possible, at least for now. In the absence of any definitive proof of the
>>> meaning of anything, we feel the need to know what exactly things are,
>>> what
>>> each thing is. The final word on this issue is THE WORD itself. The word
>>> for
>>> a thing is what we have to go on for sensing what the thing means to us.
>>> Since the effect on us of a thing and the meaning for us of that thing
>>> are
>>> one and the same, and since the actual sound of the word affects us
>>> deeply,
>>> reliably and in the same way as it affects everyone else, we lean on this
>>> word-sound-affect thingy to inform us of what any particular
>>>  thing means for us. It is the collection of word sounds called language
>>> that creates human culture. We have a world full of things, of which we
>>> know
>>> naught; and we have sounds we make with our body, the affects of which we
>>> experience subconsciously.
>>>
>>>    Spoken language tends to be quite stable through time and hence,
>>> culture is likewise stable.
>>>
>>>    We can sense the meaning of things only in those ways that we can be
>>> affected by things. In order to sense, one must be affected. If one is
>>> not
>>> affected, one does not sense. In how many different ways can one be
>>> affected
>>> by things? How would we determine that?  In how many different ways can
>>> we
>>> be affected by the sounds we make with our voice? How would we determine
>>> that? The way we are affected by things is different with different
>>> people
>>> and at different times with each person. The ways we are affected by our
>>> voices is the same for all people and at all times with each person. The
>>> effects on us of our voices is the currency we use in order to determine
>>> the
>>> effects on os of all other things. As we are affected by the sounds of
>>> any
>>> given word for any given thing is how we assume we are affected by that
>>> thing. The word acts as a kind of magical window through which we peer in
>>> order to seemingly gain a glimpse of the true nature of whatever it is
>>>  we are considering. When we consider a thing, we have the thing itself
>>> in
>>> front of us. It is alien to us. It does not talk. It does not tell us
>>> what
>>> it is. It just exists mysteriously. However, we do have the word for the
>>> thing. The word speaks to us in our own language. It moves us literally
>>> with
>>> the motions of our bodies. And we are affected deeply by its presence.
>>> Which
>>> one informs us of the affect on us of any given thing, the thing itself
>>> or
>>> the word for the thing? The word is the handle we use to get a feeling of
>>> the meaning of the thing. We derive a sense of the meaning of any thing
>>> by
>>> hearing the word for that thing.
>>>
>>>    This sense of meaning we acquire from our language is not based on
>>> absolute knowledge of the ultimate affect on we humans of any thing. It
>>> is a
>>> product of our own particular language and different from the sense one
>>> acquires from using another language.
>>>
>>>
>>>   30
>>>
>>>    So, what does this matter? If our only sense of the meanings of things
>>> derives from our language, then what we subliminally assume to be the
>>> givens
>>> of our world are bestowed upon us, as a people, by our language. This
>>> sense
>>> of what our world means informs our decisions, be they consciously or
>>> subconsciously motivated, for underlying all conscious considerations is
>>> whatever resides in our subconscious. The contents of the subconscious
>>> sends
>>> compelling feelings and emotions which drive behavior, behavior which we
>>> rationalize by explaining why we do what we do.  If one disobeys the
>>> emotional promptings/demands of one’s subconscious, one experiences a
>>> sense
>>> of disassociation and consequently anxiety. Anxiety is disabling and we
>>> strongly tend to avoid it. Therefore, we are held hostage by the contents
>>> of
>>> our subconscious minds. Our culture, which is the product of our
>>> language,
>>> is the most influential factor among those that contribute to the values
>>>  we have stored beneath the surface of our awarenesses.
>>>    We humans live in a sea of mystery. Non-cognitive creatures are
>>> informed of the import of the varied situations they encounter by their
>>> instincts, whereas we are mainly informed by culture. This provides us
>>> with
>>> greater adaptability and also creates the risk of us “falling off the
>>> apple
>>> cart” of the sense of knowing provided by culture. Culture is somewhat
>>> like
>>> an overcoat which we can remove, and instincts are more like fur,
>>> (permanent). If we remove our cultural coat we are then without our
>>> familiar
>>> input of information as to the meanings of the things that make up our
>>> world. Without our common culture, (a product of our common language), we
>>> have only our individual experiences, and nothing to provide a basis for
>>> society. Nonverbal species have instincts to guide their social behavior.
>>> Humans have culture. Xenophobia is a result of identification with the
>>> familiar. In the hustle and bustle of everyday life, most humans have
>>> little
>>> time to
>>>  question and to seek answers. We are geared up for a competitive,
>>> rat-racy
>>> way of life, in which “wars and rumors of war” are commonplace. We simply
>>> absorb our culture and then act out our role in it.
>>>
>>>                               How Do We Know Anything?
>>>
>>>    We know when we need to pee. We know when we are hungry, tired or
>>> attracted to a potential mate. How do we know these fundamental things?
>>> We
>>> FEEL them. We don’t wonder if they are true or ponder how we know them.
>>> We
>>> just know. How could we prove that any of the things that we feel
>>> actually
>>> exist? We would not be able to prove their existence or the existence of
>>> any
>>> other given. We go by what is there. Our feelings inform us of how we are
>>> affected by whatever it is that is there that affects us. The
>>> subconscious
>>> rational mind accepts our feelings as givens and operates according to
>>> them
>>> as starting premises.
>>>
>>>    While our beliefs are in relation to our feelings, also our feelings
>>> are in relation to our beliefs. That is why we, as humans, are capable of
>>> heinous acts, acts that a non-idological person would recoil from.
>>> Whatever
>>> beliefs we adopt are part of the lens through which we gaze when we
>>> interpret more primary things. If we dare to abandon our beliefs and to
>>> simply allow ourselves to perceive our world as it is, without being
>>> interpreted according to beliefs, we then feel it as it is. If we realize
>>> that we really do not know what anything means separate from how we feel
>>> it
>>> is, that its ultimate meaning is a mystery, then we are able to perceive
>>> it
>>> without the intermediation of our
>>>                                                    31
>>>
>>> cultural conditioning.
>>>    Since we react emotionally to the emotive processes of others, to the
>>> sights and sounds of others’ emotional goings-on, the sounds of others’
>>> words, as well as the sounds of our own words, affect us emotionally.  We
>>> are affected by human vocal sounds as sounds separate from words and as
>>> components of words. When we use vocal sounds as words, the affects on us
>>> of
>>> the sounds stand as representing the affects on us of the things which we
>>> label with those words. The affect on us of the sounds of the word,
>>> “walrus”, is accepted by us as revealing the affect on us of the thing,
>>> “walrus”. The effect of the word replaces the effect of the thing; the
>>> material is superseded by the abstract; the map replaces the territory.
>>> In
>>> this way, we become creatures of our culture. Spoken language uses
>>> emotional
>>> feelings to represent the various things in our world.
>>>
>>>    Ever since language started, it has been informing us of h
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca