Does consciousness arise out of having a language?

@jgweed,

jgweed wrote:

It is not language that is sloppy, but its use.

If consciousness is generally seen as being "aware of surroundings and being able to react to them, then to some degree we share this with all locomotive animals, as we do rudimentary memory in the higher forms of life.
As with other animals, our language allows us to communicate the present, but it does not allow them to communicate the past or the future outside of warnings and immediate wants. For this reason, they are unable to transcend their instincts.
It would appear that (self) consciousness is absent from other animals because they are unable to conceive of an enduring self, or that the self is necessarily mortal. It would also appear, if we carefully avoid anthropomorphism, that other animals are incapable of logic, reason, and abstraction.

I might just try disputing that theory...i think certain primates who are self aware do have language and also dolphins who are self aware have language..it seems to me self awareness is the trigger for language..its the desire to communicate and impress ones individuality on another of your kind..Communicating further than threats and mood like wolves or lions only becomes apparent with self awareness..

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

jgweed-

If a language is so convoluted that there are international competitions to see if one can spell it's words correctly, I consider that a sloppy language from the beginning.

I disagree with your definition of consciousness. How do you define "aware"?

However, I do agree with your point that animals are unable to transcend their instincts. I consider being able to transcend one's instincts a big part of consciousness. I also agree that animals are incapable of logic, reason, and knowledge of a "self", and that this is mainly because of not having a language.

xris-

I can't imagine self awareness existing without language. Dolphins and primates do not have the self-referential and logically complete language I mentioned as being necessary for consciousness. They do not have a language; only a means of communication.

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

everything is conscious but not aware of their own being , examples .. recognition of oneself in the mirror or being aware of the stars they all show a certain awareness that creates a greater desire to communicate beyond basic necessity..

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

By "everything", do you mean all animals, or all things?

And what definition of consciousness are you using?

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

I did not mean to argue that lower animals do not have language adequate to communicate "here I am" "danger" and so forth (as well as body signals for much the same communication), but that it is limited to the immediate present. One could say they always speak in the present tense, but the past and future tenses are unknown to them.

By awareness, I meant the ability to receive sense-impressions and to react to these, however they may actually be formed in their brains. My faithful dog and I, for example, both avoid running into the same object, but for me it is a "tree" in my "yard" that was planted by the previous "owner." The world of which we both are aware need not be the same; Molly can hear sounds I cannot, smell rabbits out of my sight, and I can see a rabbit at a distance when it is frozen still that she cannot if upwind, and so on.

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

Then your keyboard is aware, right? It has a sense of touch, and reacts to this by sending electrical signals to your computer.

The "language" you refer to when you speak of lower animals is what I meant by a simple means of communication. The transistors in your computer use a means of communication. A "real" language, though, is a means of communication that is semantically closed. (YES! I remembered the word Tarski used!)

Where semantically closed means
1: being logically complete
2: being it's own metalanguage

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

By "everything", do you mean all animals, or all things?

And what definition of consciousness are you using?

everything and varying degrees of consciousness or awareness for everything..

0 Replies

@jgweed,

jgweed wrote:

I did not mean to argue that lower animals do not have language adequate to communicate "here I am" "danger" and so forth (as well as body signals for much the same communication), but that it is limited to the immediate present. One could say they always speak in the present tense, but the past and future tenses are unknown to them.

By awareness, I meant the ability to receive sense-impressions and to react to these, however they may actually be formed in their brains. My faithful dog and I, for example, both avoid running into the same object, but for me it is a "tree" in my "yard" that was planted by the previous "owner." The world of which we both are aware need not be the same; Molly can hear sounds I cannot, smell rabbits out of my sight, and I can see a rabbit at a distance when it is frozen still that she cannot if upwind, and so on.

Dolphins for one have a complex language and primates can be encouraged to use language...we are all on the same ladder of progression.As one sense increases the others can diminish.

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

Primates (including humans) only become conscious once they are taught language.
Dolphins do not have a semantically closed language, and are therefore not conscious.

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

Primates (including humans) only become conscious once they are taught language.
Dolphins do not have a semantically closed language, and are therefore not conscious.

i think you had better do some research because dolphins are aware so are conscious and if they aint you prove it.. and humans are in your opinion equal in their consciousness to primates...

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

xris-

Define "aware". Once you do, show why it's the same thing as being conscious.

Like I said, IMO, something is conscious if and only if it communicates with itself using a semantically closed language. Show me evidence dolphins use such a language, and I'll grant that they're conscious.

Also, humans are just primates. If a human doesn't know language, then yes, it's equal in consciousness to a primate, meaning it has none. If it does know language, then it's conscious.

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

xris-

Define "aware". Once you do, show why it's the same thing as being conscious.

Like I said, IMO, something is conscious if and only if it communicates with itself using a semantically closed language. Show me evidence dolphins use such a language, and I'll grant that they're conscious.

Also, humans are just primates. If a human doesn't know language, then yes, it's equal in consciousness to a primate, meaning it has none. If it does know language, then it's conscious.

Conscious of one self not the opposite to being unconscious, aware..Dogs are alive but not aware of themselves as individuals, they dont recognise themselves in the water they bark at themselves in the mirror..primates are aware of themselves so are dolphins.its scientific fact..now whether dolphins relate to each other through language ,yes they do...

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

Did you read what I said?

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

Did you read what I said?

yes whats your problem

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

Sorry,

1: What do you mean by "Conscious of one self not the opposite to being unconscious, aware.."

2: IMO, something is conscious if and only if it communicates with itself using a semantically closed language. So, this does not mean self-aware, right?

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

Sorry,

1: What do you mean by "Conscious of one self not the opposite to being unconscious, aware.."

2: IMO, something is conscious if and only if it communicates with itself using a semantically closed language. So, this does not mean self-aware, right?

i mean being aware of one self.. seperate from nature...animals are one with nature something we strive to be on occassions.You dont need language to recognise yourself...

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

Well, IMO, recognizing yourself isn't consciousness. There was even a robot made not too long ago that could recognize itself in a mirror, don't remember what it was called though. Basically, it just had a pattern on it's face, and was programmed to recognize it. That's not consciousness, is it?

1 Reply

@jknilinux,

jknilinux wrote:

Well, IMO, recognizing yourself isn't consciousness. There was even a robot made not too long ago that could recognize itself in a mirror, don't remember what it was called though. Basically, it just had a pattern on it's face, and was programmed to recognize it. That's not consciousness, is it?

... careful there ... if you start denying that "X is a sign of consciousness", pretty soon you'll run out of X's and all you'll be left to construct consciousness from is some form of vitalism ... as for a language-based definition of consciousness, I think that from this perspective we may already be able to say that computers are conscious: News in Science - Computer writes its own fairytale - 07/02/2007 ... and that doesn't even include the myriad of semantically closed machine languages a computer can use to talk to itself ...

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

Well, IMO, there's only one sign of consciousness, and that's knowing a semantically closed language and using it to communicate with oneself.

According to this definition, yes, computers can become conscious. There are none currently, though, because all they do so far is simulate the outward effects of consciousness (quite poorly, I might add) while not actually fulfilling the definition of consciousness.
If a computer did actually use a semantically closed language to refer to itself, then it would become conscious, though.

0 Replies

@jknilinux,

I would be interested to see answers to the specific questions paulhanke asks about Helen Keller in reply #9. I do not think consciousness, as normally understood, necessarily requires language. But, as has been said, perhaps it depends on what is meant by 'consciousness'.

Is consciousness defined as requiring a semantically closed language? Or does that requirement emerge inductively from the everyday meaning of the word? I think this point needs to be clarified.

0 Replies

Does consciousness arise out of having a language?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know