Thinking without language?

[Peter T. Daniels]

patrik bagge wrote:
> 
> >> >It would be better if this whole thread on thinking WITHOUT language
> >> >were to simply disappear from sci.LANG ...
> >>
> >> i might agree that crossposting isn't always such a good idea,
> >> but 'better' ?
> >> for who,why,when ?
> >>
> >> i find it extremely rewarding to read all these bright individuals
> >> , coming in different flavour of belief.
> >
> >For sci.lang, obviously ...
> 
> obviously?

Because that's the group I mentioned!!

> >I don't recognize you as a sci.lang poster;
> 
> no, i'm not competent in linguistics....

Irrelevant to following sci.lang; you could learn some by doing so,
though.

> i might have a little understanding in the human brain.
> 
> >if you're from one of the other four newsgroups this thread is going to
> >(is there a way to discover where it originated?), its absence here
> >shouldn't affect you at all.
> 
> no, it doesn't affect me at all, if i'm not mistaken here it was
> Arthur T. Murray that started this cross-post thread.
> 
> The newsgroups seems to be comp.ai.philosophy, comp.ai.nat-lang
> , sci.lang.bionet, bionet.neuroscience, alt.consciousness

There's no "sci.lang.bionet"

> The only one taking offense to the discussion seems to be you
> , how come ?

I find it very difficult to simply ignore postings in the two newsgroups
I frequent. Maybe everyone else in sci.lang just ignores the whole
thread, making it truly a waste of bandwidth to continue posting it
here.

> If we all are off wall and *wrong* then be a scientist and correct
> us in our ways..

I haven't the slightest idea what you've been talking about, or why
you're now inflicting it on sci.lang!
-- 
Peter T. Daniels     grammatim at worldnet.att.net