Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-10-2012, 08:21 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 02:41 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 01:21 AM)I and I Wrote:  A thought comes before an individuals words all the time. The thought or idea of a god existed before we were born, we were born then we learned of this belief/thought and how others in the past thought of this.

Language isn't an individualistic experience, it's a communal and cultural experience that comes with past concepts, past ideologies, and past belief systems.

This language in it's use in the communal sense is still a result of material production....Karl Marx. Drinking Beverage

Bullshit. Someone "else's" concept existed in a brain that had learned what that word means. THAT is some woo-woo. And that quote just contradicted yourself.

"Language isn't an individualistic experience, it's a communal and cultural experience that comes with past concepts, past ideologies, and past belief systems."

Among other things.

So no concepts or ideas existed before you knew about them? They just magically appear when YOU specifically learned about them.....along with unicorns and woo woo dildos.

Can you name any idea, concept, belief that was not related to past ideas, concepts and beliefs in any way?

1. Humans are born into a culture
2. This culture has belief structures and concepts in place BEFORE any particular human is born.
3. This person as an individual then is influenced by society then goes on to have ideas that are similar in different degrees.

One person might grow up to believe in an all encompassing thing that is the answer to everything, one person might go on to believe in an all encompassing "scientific theory" that can explain everything. Both are steaming piles of bullshit and both are very similar. And both of these ideas existed before you were born.

You are using English which has old words, Spanish words, french words from hundreds of years ago mixed in the language. Yes fuckball, shit from the past, shit before you were born has had an influence on you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 09:27 AM (This post was last modified: 18-10-2012 09:37 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 08:21 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 02:41 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Bullshit. Someone "else's" concept existed in a brain that had learned what that word means. THAT is some woo-woo. And that quote just contradicted yourself.

"Language isn't an individualistic experience, it's a communal and cultural experience that comes with past concepts, past ideologies, and past belief systems."

Among other things.

So no concepts or ideas existed before you knew about them? They just magically appear when YOU specifically learned about them.....along with unicorns and woo woo dildos.

Can you name any idea, concept, belief that was not related to past ideas, concepts and beliefs in any way?

1. Humans are born into a culture
2. This culture has belief structures and concepts in place BEFORE any particular human is born.
3. This person as an individual then is influenced by society then goes on to have ideas that are similar in different degrees.

One person might grow up to believe in an all encompassing thing that is the answer to everything, one person might go on to believe in an all encompassing "scientific theory" that can explain everything. Both are steaming piles of bullshit and both are very similar. And both of these ideas existed before you were born.

You are using English which has old words, Spanish words, french words from hundreds of years ago mixed in the language. Yes fuckball, shit from the past, shit before you were born has had an influence on you.

Yes bitch. And you "learned them". Fuckwad. They did not just "pop" into your unbelievably stupid retarded troll brain.
Fuckwad-troll is conflating "thoughts" with "culture". "Culture" exists ONLY in brains which have learned specific language and thought systems. Natives in South American jungles do not "think" about "Existentialism", or Marx.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 09:43 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
What's with all the name-calling and personal insults between you (BuckyBall) and I and I? Consider

Cut it out already, or you'll be sent to the corner.

[Image: tumblr_m9ms09NhbT1rpmk0go9_r1_500.jpg]

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 10:00 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 09:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 08:21 AM)I and I Wrote:  So no concepts or ideas existed before you knew about them? They just magically appear when YOU specifically learned about them.....along with unicorns and woo woo dildos.

Can you name any idea, concept, belief that was not related to past ideas, concepts and beliefs in any way?

1. Humans are born into a culture
2. This culture has belief structures and concepts in place BEFORE any particular human is born.
3. This person as an individual then is influenced by society then goes on to have ideas that are similar in different degrees.

One person might grow up to believe in an all encompassing thing that is the answer to everything, one person might go on to believe in an all encompassing "scientific theory" that can explain everything. Both are steaming piles of bullshit and both are very similar. And both of these ideas existed before you were born.

You are using English which has old words, Spanish words, french words from hundreds of years ago mixed in the language. Yes fuckball, shit from the past, shit before you were born has had an influence on you.

Yes bitch. And you "learned them". Fuckwad. They did not just "pop" into your unbelievably stupid retarded troll brain.
Fuckwad-troll is conflating "thoughts" with "culture". "Culture" exists ONLY in brains which have learned specific language and thought systems. Natives in South American jungles do not "think" about "Existentialism", or Marx.

are you mentally insane? My first comment on this thread I said that ideas do exist before "thought" because we are born into a culture that has already existing ideologies, beliefs etc.
You tried to refute that claim and said that was woo woo to think that.

Now you agree with me?

Have you taken your meds?

In my first post in this thread i also said "A thought comes before an individuals words all the time. The thought or idea of a god existed before we were born, we were born then we learned of this belief/thought and how others in the past thought of this."

You seem to be pissed off at this post and agree with it at the same time? amazing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 10:06 AM (This post was last modified: 18-10-2012 10:14 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 10:00 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 09:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yes bitch. And you "learned them". Fuckwad. They did not just "pop" into your unbelievably stupid retarded troll brain.
Fuckwad-troll is conflating "thoughts" with "culture". "Culture" exists ONLY in brains which have learned specific language and thought systems. Natives in South American jungles do not "think" about "Existentialism", or Marx.

are you mentally insane? My first comment on this thread I said that ideas do exist before "thought" because we are born into a culture that has already existing ideologies, beliefs etc.
You tried to refute that claim and said that was woo woo to think that.

Now you agree with me?

Have you taken your meds?

In my first post in this thread i also said "A thought comes before an individuals words all the time. The thought or idea of a god existed before we were born, we were born then we learned of this belief/thought and how others in the past thought of this."

You seem to be pissed off at this post and agree with it at the same time? amazing

"Thoughts" do not exist apart from "thinkers". Unless of course, one is the High Priestess of Woo Woo. All hail I^2. High Priestess of Woo. Bowing

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 10:26 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 10:06 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 10:00 AM)I and I Wrote:  are you mentally insane? My first comment on this thread I said that ideas do exist before "thought" because we are born into a culture that has already existing ideologies, beliefs etc.
You tried to refute that claim and said that was woo woo to think that.

Now you agree with me?

Have you taken your meds?

In my first post in this thread i also said "A thought comes before an individuals words all the time. The thought or idea of a god existed before we were born, we were born then we learned of this belief/thought and how others in the past thought of this."

You seem to be pissed off at this post and agree with it at the same time? amazing

"Thoughts" do not exist apart from "thinkers". Unless of course, one is the High Priestess of Woo Woo. All hail I^2. High Priestess of Woo. Bowing

nobody ever said that thoughts exist apart from thinkers. Do you read the posts at all before you respond?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 10:46 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 09:43 AM)Vosur Wrote:  What's with all the name-calling and personal insults between you (BuckyBall) and I and I? Consider

Cut it out already, or you'll be sent to the corner.

[Image: tumblr_m9ms09NhbT1rpmk0go9_r1_500.jpg]

Oooh. Promise I can have that hat for Halloween ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 10:48 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 10:26 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 10:06 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "Thoughts" do not exist apart from "thinkers". Unless of course, one is the High Priestess of Woo Woo. All hail I^2. High Priestess of Woo. Bowing

nobody ever said that thoughts exist apart from thinkers. Do you read the posts at all before you respond?

"My first comment on this thread I said that ideas do exist before "thought" because we are born into a culture that has already existing"

Yes you did moron. Have you considered learning to read ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 11:35 AM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(18-10-2012 10:48 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-10-2012 10:26 AM)I and I Wrote:  nobody ever said that thoughts exist apart from thinkers. Do you read the posts at all before you respond?

"My first comment on this thread I said that ideas do exist before "thought" because we are born into a culture that has already existing"

Yes you did moron. Have you considered learning to read ?


Yes, past beliefs influence todays beliefs, therefore the thoughts and beliefs you have as an individual are learned from, copied from pre-existing peoples thoughts and ideas. Are you really that stupid not to know that?

So.....where do your thoughts come from if you believe they don't come from pre-existing ideas and beliefs?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2012, 02:00 PM
RE: Reification Fallacy, "god(s)" and human language
(17-10-2012 02:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(17-10-2012 01:58 PM)Vera Wrote:  Am I allowed to argue that it learns the idea of twoness by "seeing two objects" and it also learns what to call it when it hears the word others used to describe?

(And what if it cannot speak and uses a different means to express twoness, for example, sign language, would that be a slightly different idea of twoness because the sign to express it is different?)

You can. But it would have no idea what the word meant when it hears it, if the concept of twoness had not already been learned. It had to get the information from somewhere. The word would have no meaning, if the baby had not learned something, a priori.

BTW, a quick side note (because you happened to choose numbers as your example) - while I think as much as (or rather, more) in English, than I do in my own language, counting is the one thing I always do in my language (unless I have to count out loud to a speaker of another language, obviously). Have always found that quite interesting, but still haven't looked into why it might be so...

Anyway...

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: