In article <FLon8o.ML8 at turnbull.org>, john at turnbull.org (John Turnbull) wrote:
>In article <7f7lj98m42.fsf at faith.csis.hku.hk>,
>Lee Sau Dan ~{@nJX6X~} <sdlee at faith.csis.hku.hk> wrote:
>>>>>>> "John" == John Turnbull <john at turnbull.org> writes:
>>> John> Have you ever hummed a tune without realizing it?
>>>I can hum a tune in my mind.
>>That wasn't really the question. I would imagine most people can play
>music in their 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.
You are in shit of the lowest grade up to your ears
with this kind of "reasoning".
------------------------- end of input -----------------------
>>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?)
>>Maybe I am being too restrictive when I say thinking, and mean
>reasoning. You still haven't given an idea where you think the line is
>between thinking and non-thinking response. I think the reason words
>seem so important is that ideas can be expressed in words, and the words
>are inherently invoked. Just as if the word "apple" is thought about
>you will recall the taste, or the feel, or the image of an apple, if you
>think about the idea of an apple the word is known as easily as the
>other features.
>>> 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.
>>It's been a *long* time since I've done any geometry, and I'd probably
>need to draw diagrams, but it would be in response to thoughts in words.
>>John
