Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| ideas:artifact_of_language [2023-10-22 18:58] – awfki | ideas:artifact_of_language [2023-10-22 23:01] (current) – awfki |
|---|
| ====== Artifacts of Language ====== | ====== Artifact of Language ====== |
| FIXME | An artifact of language is when you have to say something that's not what you want to say because your language doesn't have the right words for the concepts you're talking about. |
| |
| If you're into meditation you don't get very far before it becomes obvious how hard it is to talk about some of the concepts. <wrap lo>(FIXME: examples)</wrap> Like, talking about how there is no self while constantly using the word "I". Artifacts of language are the artificial places where your language makes you refer to a concept or idea that you're arguing against. <wrap lo>(I feel that's neither clear nor accurate but it'll do for the moment.)</wrap> | In meditation and related philosophy we hit this a lot in talking about the self. We say there is [[no self]] but then constantly use the words "I" and "you" because it's the easiest way refer to a person. We //could// bend the language but then things become cumbersome and harder to understand. |
| |
| | Put another way, artifacts of language are the places where your language makes you refer to a concept or idea in a way that's counter to your argument so you're relying on the reader/listener to cut you some slack. |
| |
| <wrap lo>PS. I feel that I don't know whether it should "clear nor accurate" or "clear or accurate" and apparently I don't care enough to consult Google.</wrap> | [[Non-dualism]] is a good example of a place where language complicates discussion. |
