What came first, speech or mouth.

The way I see it words are just tools we use to express ourselves. But one can not gain true knowledge without words. True knowledge has been built up over decades, mostly written down in books and scrolls. How could one obtain such knowledge without using words, without communication?
Another clear thing is that you can work things out with speech. Knowledge and Speech go together. For one can't gain knowledge without speech, and one can't gain speech without some form of knowledge.

That's where I stand.

I wish Helen Keller were alive to answer that .

For those who don't know who Helen keller is;
About Helen Keller
You can read all about her, as I did.

Chai Tea, I don't know whether you tried to put my argument down or try to strengthen it. But I see the argument 'I wish Helen Keller were alive to answer that' as a confirmation to what I said earlier.

No, not trying to put you down at all.

my statement refered to her communication directly.

she had no sight, she had not hearing....the power of speech was purely a technical stretching of the muscles for her.

she did not rely on speech for knowledge.

but she needed the speach to gain knowledge.

No, she didn't need speach to gain knowledge.

her teacher tought her through sign language. she could never hear speach, she could never see people lips move.

In the time before anne sullivan came along, helen keller attained knowledge on her own.

She gained the knowledge of where she was to go if she were to find food, she knew which people would comfort her and which would not. She knew when she encountered strangers.
She gained knowledge of when she was outside or inside, by what those two different environments felt like.

She had individual preferences for certain people and things, based on her experience of them.

She had knowledge of her world, such as it was.

Helen Keller never responded to speach since the day she became ill as a small child.

You could sit and speak to her all day and night, and she would never gain any knowledge from you.

speech is not only by making sound, or at least that was not the way i ment it. But still you are right about the preferences and stuff. but didn't she first - before she became ill - build up those preferences for people and stuff? and about knowing where to go for food; who says she knew that?

Sorry for my bad English. By the way.

Your English is fine.

Sorry for my bad spelling.

I'm sure she developed preferences for certain people afterwards too. For instance, her mother had another baby after she was born, and I'm willing to best Helen had some type of feelings about that. Her family was somewhat well to do and I'm sure different guests came and went. I don't believe they tried to hide Helen

As far as food, she ate with the family. She circled around the table and picked her choice of food from her family's plates, and knew the difference between foods

Also, she DEFINATELY do NOT have a preference for anne sullivan at first!

If you really want to learn more about Helen, I can recommend two movies that were made about her early years.

Both are called "The Miracle Worker" I think there's a book of the same name.

In the first movie, black and white, Anne Bancroft played Anne Sullivan and Patty Duke played Helen.

Later a remake was done where Ms. Duke played Anne Sullivan.

They are both very good. Actually the older version was on the other night, and I really enjoyed watching it again.

Patty Duke was only maybe 8 or 10 and did a really good job as Helen, and Anne Bancroft, as ususal, was fabulous.

ok well, maybe I'll check them later this week, for now, you are absolutely right I suppose, about all that..

its just I had never heard of Helen before, but when you mentioned her name I did some research and found that site (posted way above) .. I read all that, and drew my conclusions of that.

And thank you for saying my 'English is fine.' really appreciate that.

you are kind of right, you do NOT need speech to gain knowledge, tho we are talking about simple knowledge now, and not the kind of knowledge I was talking about before..

Where do you draw the line between simple knowledge and true knowledge?

If I were raised by a mute, who couldn't right, and we had no contact with others, the mute could teach me all sorts of things.....How to build a house type of stuff, but also about compassion and love.
He could teach respect for property, or even respect for a diety. He could teach dance and meaning of stories through dance and motion.

He could teach math, one object plus one object equals 2 objects.

Then, I could pass this on to others. Obviously would be more limited than having the power of speech, but I think that's true knowledge

I do see your point though on the importance of speech as a tool.

Not to dwell on Keller, but for instance........

she made little or no progress with Sullivan, until she was able to relate the combination of sign language she felt in her hands to an actual object.

The classic story goes something like this...

before helen became ill, she was JUST starting to make sounds relating to speach, one of them being waa waa, meaning water, for when she wanted a drink.

In the breakthough moment helen understood that the water sullivan was simultaneously pumping into her hands from the water pump, and signing into her hand, meant the same thing. Apparantly she looked up, thinking hard, and produced the sound waa waa from her mouth, as she tied the 3 things together.

From then on, her education progressed much faster, as she related the feel of an egg, or a broom to the hand signs.

yes, I read about that; in the few hours after her first combination she learned 30+ new combinations, most of them on their way back from the waterpump to their cottage.

again, I must say, you are right. But speech makes it so much easier to pass on knowledge, and to obtain knowledge. As you said, speech is a pretty important tool.

and keep dwelling on keller, it makes a lot clear..

oh, I'm not trying to get you to keep saying I'm right.....just a little back and forth of ideas.

I'm just a simple peasant.

BTW welcome to A2K.

So am I :wink:

But we seem to share the same oppinnion about this. And I most certainly got amused by discussing this with you!

Thank you for welcoming me!, I wish I could say the same to you, but I can't since you have been on the forums for a while.

Chai Tea you are wrong and List0ric is right! "Knowledge and Speech go together." That is because speech is not something spoken to another only, it is also a dialogue between yourself. If that were not true, no one in this world would be able to think and synthesize information and so arrive at a conclusion. According to you, knowledge and so synthesis of information can happen only when one speaks to another, different from self. That is not so.

I read something recently about a theory that babies "invented" language as their mothers became more upright and less hairy (over gazillions of years) the babies were not attached directly to the mothers any more the children developed ways to call out for various kinds of help, and the mothers needed ways to alert them to dangers, call them close, identify one over another etc.

Which may explain why women are much better communicators than men.