http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=173384


in reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: don't { use Perl }
in thread don't { use Perl }

Forgive what could be a stupid question.

If language and thought interact (by which I mean affect each other)...

And language is inherently less flexible than thought (as evidenced by all languages being contained within all thought)

Then wouldn't language be the limiting factor by definition? Not necessarily indicating that it must limit thought, but that in a system involving language and thought, language will always have fewer possible effects on thought than thought can have on language?

-----------------------
You are what you think.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: SW Hypothesis
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 11, 2002 at 07:40 UTC
    Exactly. And not a stupid question by any means. Your final sentence sums it up (though I think you have the premises in reverse). If language must have fewer effects on thought than vica versa, language is neither the limiting factor on thought, nor even a limiting factor on thought. Wittgenstein did get some things wrong.
[reply]

In Section Meditations