>>>>> "John" == John Turnbull <john at turnbull.org> writes:
John> The second one I would agree with, if you are not conscious,
John> you are not thinking. To me thinking is the answering of
.......................................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
John> questions, which requires explicit communication between
..........^^^^^^^^^
John> different parts of the brain, and some language is needed
John> for that. For me words are the language. Pictures and
John> diagrams are occasionally useful to help clarify things or
John> gain a different insight, but the question and answer are
John> still in words.
So, thinking MUST be verbal, you YOUR definition. Period.
John> Have you ever hummed a tune without realizing it?
I can hum a tune in my mind.
John> Just
John> knowing what you are doing and feeling maybe consciousness,
John> but I don't think that it is thinking. Asking the question
John> "what am I doing?" tends to get a verbal answer.
I can "ask" that "question" without thinking in words. I often think
in a language-less manner. I can easily form the question in any
language I'm fluent at. So, when I think, I use language-independent
concepts. Only when I have to speak them out do I transform these
ideas into words, and order them by the grammar rules of the language
desired. So, in a Cantonese context, I would say [NO13 tsou22 k at n35
mE53 a33]? In a Mandarin context, I would say <wo3 zai4 gan4
shen4me>? In an English context, I would say "what am I doing"? In a
French context, I would say "qu'est-ce que je faire maintenant?", etc.
When I don't need to speak it out, the idea can stay language-less in
my mind.
John> what am I doing? why am I doing it? is there a better way?
John> all without words? Maybe so, but it seems to me a lot
John> better to use words.
Yes, except for the "why" question. Answering a "why" question
requires reasoning, and reasoning often needs verbal thinking. But
answering "what" and existence questions, I can do it without words.
Even when answering "why" questions, I can sometimes do it
language-lessly. So, that's again without words. (When I don't need
to speak out the answers, why do I have to render the ideas in a
language?)
John> OK, so you draw pictures with no words.
I often avoid words in the pictures. When I need to represent some
ideas (esp. abstract ones) with words, I usually use the first letter
(in case of English) to represent the whole idea. So, that serves
only as a symbol (somehow arbitrary) or mark to remind me that that
particular letter stands for that particular idea.
John> My diagrams tend to
John> be more of arrangements of words on the page. Words are so
John> much more efficient than wasting all that time with images.
When I do geometry or solve geometric problems, I would draw the
figures wordlessly. Yes, I would *label* some features (points,
edges, angles) with letters, but they are only labels. If I have
enough pens of different colours, I could do the labeling by means of
colours instead of letters. That doesn't prevent me from thinking
about the geometric problems.
--
Lee Sau Dan $(0,X)wAV(B(Big5) ~{@nJX6X~}(HZ)
.----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|http://www.cs.hku.hk/~sdlee e-mail: sdlee at csis.hku.hk |
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
