Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Sounds Then Speech Then Language.


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#18 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 06:53 AM

A civilization depends upon the written word, not only to pass on knowledge to the rest of society but in a way that is more efficient than word of mouth is - hence tribal society never gets beyond this or needs to (fifty people by word of mouth or five thousand by pen and ink via scrolls, over a larger territory or as nowadays, the world itself). CGI artists are the next step up to traditional artists but some people still aspire to the old and inefficient ways because of 'class'- that is they want to 'appear' sophisticated, rather than be 'modern.' Advertising magicians lie to sell things and the rich get their money by finding new things to sell society that it may or may not need but may want. As for my quote that came from witnessing an American cop trying to sound sophisticated by using long words, rather than getting to the point (simple truth). The reason we discuss things over and over again, is to refine our knowledge and get it spot on. When we do this, we give up on the subject because it bores us stiff then.

#19 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 07:56 AM

A civilization depends upon the written word, not only to pass on knowledge to the rest of society but in a way that is more efficient than word of mouth is - hence tribal society never gets beyond this or needs to (fifty people by word of mouth or five thousand by pen and ink via scrolls, over a larger territory or as nowadays, the world itself).CGI artists are the next step up to traditional artists but some people still aspire to the old and inefficient ways because of 'class'- that is they want to 'appear' sophisticated, rather than be 'modern.'Advertising magicians lie to sell things and the rich get their money by finding new things to sell society that it may or may not need but may want.As for my quote that came from witnessing an American cop trying to sound sophisticated by using long words, rather than getting to the point (simple truth).The reason we discuss things over and over again, is to refine our knowledge and get it spot on. When we do this, we give up on the subject because it bores us stiff then.



It's exactly what I am getting at... the new language: That of the CGI word, doesn't actually require human intervention. Once an AI processor has learnt to copy the methods, and reasons to which those picture scapes are made, "IT" can create the art for us. Which then begs the question again, what is the point to have learnt to have written in the first place? I mayaswell bury myself now in stasis and await the time when such art from our creationista machine churns out everything for me, from blondes through too multilingual, multi experiential environment/scapes to live in.... Or I could drown myself with a statue of Mother Mary, and stare at that as my battery dies out. (Yes that is reference to a movie)

#20 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:33 AM

Well yes, when machines become self-activating. Perhaps as has been argued, if this world is actually a kind of hologram already, then it would be a case of a programmed robot (us), creating other programmed robots or as a poet once put it fleas, upon fleas ad infinitum.

#21 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 12:18 PM

Well yes, when machines become self-activating. Perhaps as has been argued, if this world is actually a kind of hologram already, then it would be a case of a programmed robot (us), creating other programmed robots or as a poet once put it fleas, upon fleas ad infinitum.


and this is where we answer our question about evolution. It's just info sharing...language.

To me language in the universe has been tied to emotion, not to adhere the entity to a grasp of reality but too have provided a movement that is fit for Kings and Gods to admire, and the more language that is tied to the finer graces of information that is enjoying the acts of life that it carries with itself, and shares...

The more you, and God, and the King and Queen want to stay.

...sadly, War:.
Finer... Happy.

#22 Turtle

Turtle

    Member

  • Members
  • 15089 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 05:00 PM

and this is where we answer our question about evolution. It's just info sharing...language.

To me language in the universe has been tied to emotion, not to adhere the entity to a grasp of reality but too have provided a movement that is fit for Kings and Gods to admire, and the more language that is tied to the finer graces of information that is enjoying the acts of life that it carries with itself, and shares...

The more you, and God, and the King and Queen want to stay.

...sadly, War:.
Finer... Happy.


If we had a neg rep function I would be using it. If you're not posting general bullshit you're posting bullshit that is negative and/or hateful. :irked: How about you zip it. :zip: Good frickin' grief. :cussing:



#23 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:14 AM

 

Its so fricken simple, it actually hurts to talk about it: Evolution , Language , Tools. ;and its the simplicity of it that makes you wonder, why it is so simple to begin with, and why most everybody else is stupid.

 


I think it is so bleeding stupid because action leads to understanding, it doesn't start from it (Nobody knows what the hell they are doing, they just do it and judge the results after: See my post about "What Science Is" and life as an experiment paragraph.

#24 Turtle

Turtle

    Member

  • Members
  • 15089 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 10:14 AM

   


I think it is so bleeding stupid because action leads to understanding, it doesn't start from it (Nobody knows what the hell they are doing, they just do it and judge the results after: See my post about "What Science Is" and life as an experiment paragraph.


Neg rep for you too. You know what science is like a clod of dirt knows what science is. :thumbs_do

#25 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 10:27 AM

Language, it's birth... the answer seems to be PAIN -> that's why it's so simple. We read all the stuff on what has been stated over and over again. The answer is making a "Movement". If the the state of the system is plain over a duration, it becomes nothing. Through an emotion (a reaction) you get a "movement", an opera...whalla langauge worth remembering, maybe even writing down. I would suppose that the first utterances that were repeated by apeman was ouch (actually I would suppose it too have been ALOT MORE than that in order for it too have been felt enough) Yes this is negative, and it's sad too think that our evolution is based on pain. The other word that may have been a first is FART? - I would envisage a state in which a smelly ape that had some sort of bowel problem at the time was remembered, but again this is pain induced evolution aswell. Some other obvious words that we may have remember could be, Taste specific: (yuk yum) Event Specific: (Move;as in this ape is dead why don't it move). etc etc The language of love, doesn't seem to have the duration necessary for it too be remember as something "new", ie. its one of those innate things (Not that I am a proponent of innateness; especially in todays day and age) The wierd beauty of the Fact the humans seem to be the fastest at learning means that we value emotion, and as a sideline topic we probably weren't killers to begin with (We developed a taste for it) Yes I have opened up a smorgasborg too work on, plenty too write and ponder about: none of it really testable unless your allowed to cage and torture beings into a particular state (Which we know doesn't seem to work too great anyway -> it needs to be an opera!)

#26 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 19 July 2014 - 08:30 AM

Neg rep for you too. You know what science is like a clod of dirt knows what science is. :thumbs_do

 

Sorry Turtle but can you give me a translation as I'm not sure what you mean? Didn't you poke around as a child, making discoveries by accident not design and what about Newton's experiments on himself that led to his discoveries about light (poking sticks into his eye socket and wondering about the light shows that followed).  Life starts with a theory about what you are experiencing, followed by more actions to see if this is consistent with what you believe.  As a child do you know what fire is?  No which is why so many kids get their fingers burnt.  The wise child of course watches as another child sticks their hands in the flames and then conjectures that it is not a sensible thing to do.  You experiment from your belief or simply from curiosity ("I have no special talents, I'm just passionately curious" Einstein, another scientist you may have heard of).  Alexander Fleming didn't know what he'd found when he stumbled upon penicillin initially, Einstein didn't realise that the bomb would come from his equations for a start either.  Then there's petroleum that wasn't thought to have any use and was put in kerosene lamps, until someone thought of the internal combustion engine for cars.  Trains of course would kill you, if you went faster than ten miles an hour - a theory that wasn't proved fact by actual experience, then of course there was flight and the Wright brothers, not to mention space flight (some people still don't believe that happened).  Enough said or have you other evidence rather than your displeasure to add to the conversation?



#27 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 19 July 2014 - 08:39 AM

Language, it's birth... the answer seems to be PAIN -> that's why it's so simple. We read all the stuff on what has been stated over and over again. The answer is making a "Movement". If the the state of the system is plain over a duration, it becomes nothing. Through an emotion (a reaction) you get a "movement", an opera...whalla langauge worth remembering, maybe even writing down. I would suppose that the first utterances that were repeated by apeman was ouch (actually I would suppose it too have been ALOT MORE than that in order for it too have been felt enough) Yes this is negative, and it's sad too think that our evolution is based on pain. The other word that may have been a first is FART? - I would envisage a state in which a smelly ape that had some sort of bowel problem at the time was remembered, but again this is pain induced evolution aswell. Some other obvious words that we may have remember could be, Taste specific: (yuk yum) Event Specific: (Move;as in this ape is dead why don't it move). etc etc The language of love, doesn't seem to have the duration necessary for it too be remember as something "new", ie. its one of those innate things (Not that I am a proponent of innateness; especially in todays day and age) The wierd beauty of the Fact the humans seem to be the fastest at learning means that we value emotion, and as a sideline topic we probably weren't killers to begin with (We developed a taste for it) Yes I have opened up a smorgasborg too work on, plenty too write and ponder about: none of it really testable unless your allowed to cage and torture beings into a particular state (Which we know doesn't seem to work too great anyway -> it needs to be an opera!)

You should see Jay Gould - he didn't believe in 'innate' intelligence either and somebody else has taken up the cause again lately (British) but I can't remember his name.  I wouldn't say it was pain necessarily but yes emotion and that comes from exploration.  Life goes forward - death stays were it is, happy (?) in its limitations, mental or physical.  Why is this?  Fear of death (limitation) itself.  The courageous go forward because boredom is what they fear more than bodily loss.  Sorry to digress but this applies top language too - new ideas, new terms needed to describe them (intellectual life).



#28 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 19 July 2014 - 11:10 AM

pain

 

I think it was (and actually have gone through it myself) - much like the mumblings of a dying man, pain brings out the "Sound". A group of chimps merrily munching and grooming, has it's base in communication (Visual, Smell). The next step is to try and instigate the memory centres and the vocal chords, I would presume that the first utterance would have been somewhat musical in quality, the neighbouring chimps would have then applied thier knowledge of tools too beat too the emotion (mimickery), and in true misery and the mourning process would have "Instilled" a new word/rythm. Whalla, speach. Step 2 is to have repeated the speech of that memory at the similar occasion (a passing). Step 3 is the realisation that each member is "different" : Now chimps are starting to name the passings specifically. ... you can see where I am getting at. (The obolisque in the Movie! - but my version omits the war part...thats at least a couple layers of evolution away from the initial transition)

 

NOTE: That it is not a reward/disreward pyschology example, many disiplines have tried with (like teaching dogs tricks).

 

The colloquially theory of it having todo with tools (naming different tools), or the eating of meat/need to survive (new societal organisation/observation of communication protocols of the hunted) is not actually an explanation, it's just a way of saying this is probably what happened: Which makes me shudder that I am in the eyes of learned people a Bimbo...yet any versed movie buff could have reguritated what I have just stated: I think they are just kind enough to not make a public spectacle out of it (They are waiting on the papers)

 

..Cont,

 The simplicity with which languuage is evolved through grouped species accounts for why it isn't all that diverse. (I need a symbol for knowing what my reader is thinking, and not having to explain myself) If you look at all the sounds procured on earth from animals, it's really not as much as you think. Even the birds sing in melody (which of course  brings about the chicken egg dillema - I think the birds have it on this one - ie they sang first, but did we copy them, or did we train them? (NO)) There seems to be some index relative too segregation though, eg. insects are much different too whales, and those still enamoured by visual display are somewhat an order lower.

 

Loner species: I wouldn't have a clue... which is why innate ability scares me. (eg. the Spider that just knows how to spin it)



#29 Turtle

Turtle

    Member

  • Members
  • 15089 posts

Posted 19 July 2014 - 03:15 PM

Sorry Turtle but can you give me a translation as I'm not sure what you mean? ...


I mean you blather on with meaningless drivel that has not one iota of scientific reasoning or support, let alone a reference. I don't think I can make it any more clear. :thumbs_do

#30 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 07:44 AM

I mean you blather on with meaningless drivel that has not one iota of scientific reasoning or support, let alone a reference. I don't think I can make it any more clear. :thumbs_do

This sounds like someone using insults rather than reason to back up their assumptions.  This isn't scientific either is it?  I remember you calling me a 'troll' because of how I interpreted evolution once, despite a moderator pointing out that Daniel Dennet had written a book expounding much the same thing.  Name calling is very childish and is the equivalent of a religious person calling me a 'blasphemer' (scientism in other words), so I refute your approach as unreasonable (emotional not intellectual) even if you might be right about me not referencing other people's work in this field.  I am not a scientist but a layman and this is theory (by me) not proven fact by others.  Bullying to get someone to shut up has no place on a site like this let alone in real life (suppression aimed at stopping someone expressing their views).  Last time I left this site because of it - this time I will say what I have to say and if that gets me banned, so be it.  If I was in the USA and it got me shot by you, just to shut me up, again so be it.  Bring me evidence that refutes what I say, not hot air and bluff aimed at shutting me up. :zip:



#31 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 07:47 AM

I think it was (and actually have gone through it myself) - much like the mumblings of a dying man, pain brings out the "Sound". A group of chimps merrily munching and grooming, has it's base in communication (Visual, Smell). The next step is to try and instigate the memory centres and the vocal chords, I would presume that the first utterance would have been somewhat musical in quality, the neighbouring chimps would have then applied thier knowledge of tools too beat too the emotion (mimickery), and in true misery and the mourning process would have "Instilled" a new word/rythm. Whalla, speach. Step 2 is to have repeated the speech of that memory at the similar occasion (a passing). Step 3 is the realisation that each member is "different" : Now chimps are starting to name the passings specifically. ... you can see where I am getting at. (The obolisque in the Movie! - but my version omits the war part...thats at least a couple layers of evolution away from the initial transition)

 

NOTE: That it is not a reward/disreward pyschology example, many disiplines have tried with (like teaching dogs tricks).

 

The colloquially theory of it having todo with tools (naming different tools), or the eating of meat/need to survive (new societal organisation/observation of communication protocols of the hunted) is not actually an explanation, it's just a way of saying this is probably what happened: Which makes me shudder that I am in the eyes of learned people a Bimbo...yet any versed movie buff could have reguritated what I have just stated: I think they are just kind enough to not make a public spectacle out of it (They are waiting on the papers)

 

..Cont,

 The simplicity with which languuage is evolved through grouped species accounts for why it isn't all that diverse. (I need a symbol for knowing what my reader is thinking, and not having to explain myself) If you look at all the sounds procured on earth from animals, it's really not as much as you think. Even the birds sing in melody (which of course  brings about the chicken egg dillema - I think the birds have it on this one - ie they sang first, but did we copy them, or did we train them? (NO)) There seems to be some index relative too segregation though, eg. insects are much different too whales, and those still enamoured by visual display are somewhat an order lower.

 

Loner species: I wouldn't have a clue... which is why innate ability scares me. (eg. the Spider that just knows how to spin it)

Innate ability has to be recorded experience passed on through our genes as I see it as a logical progression



#32 Turtle

Turtle

    Member

  • Members
  • 15089 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:51 AM

This sounds like ...

:blahblahblah:  :blahblahblah:  :blahblahblah:



#33 pagetheoracle

pagetheoracle

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 21 July 2014 - 04:42 AM

:blahblahblah:  :blahblahblah:  :blahblahblah:

 

So you're 14 according to your write up?  Makes sense with all this childish behaviour.  How much do you know? (You don't say what you do, where you were educated or at what level).  And you've been posting since you were in single figures (5 years old)?  Are you a child genius or something? (I'd guess something).