zlacker

[return to "Language is not essential for the cognitive processes that underlie thought"]
1. fnordp+8i4[view] [source] 2024-10-19 03:16:43
>>orcul+(OP)
For those who can’t and don’t think in words this is unsurprising.
◧◩
2. Razeng+Bq5[view] [source] 2024-10-19 18:49:30
>>fnordp+8i4
Can you count without using a "language"?

Try it now: Tap your hand on the desk randomly. Can you recall how many times you did it without "saying" a sequence in your head like "1, 2, 3" or "A, B, C" etc?

If yes, how far can you count? With a language it's effectively infinite. You could theoretically go up to "1 million 5 hundred 43 thousand, 2 hundred and 10" and effortlessly know what comes next.

◧◩◪
3. bonobo+DO5[view] [source] 2024-10-19 22:22:00
>>Razeng+Bq5
I can imagine the numbers as figures (I mean that the shape of the characters 1, 2 etc), or the patterns on a dice in sequence.

This is a parallel stream, because if I count with imagined pictures, then I can speak and listen to someone talking without it disturbing the process. If I do it with subvocalization, then doing other speech/language related things would disturb the counting.

◧◩◪◨
4. aeonik+hP5[view] [source] 2024-10-19 22:29:35
>>bonobo+DO5
Wow I've never tried this before, and I feel like this is way easier than using words.
[go to top]