Maybe ideas are nothing except the words that are used to convey them.

The words themselves can be ideas.

Tris:

So what is being conveyed here is only through contemplation on the terms is one able to differentiate the two and only those people enlightened enough to do it are skilled enough to make the difference all the rest of humanity are mindless sheep acting as if the two were the same?

A real understanding of language and how it is cognitively processed would hold such a notion as specious at best. Language and semantics are not operations that can be in any way neatly divided between concepts. One must when relating language to human behavior must approach it through a sense of the applied semantic. What people actually act upon when they process any bit of information. These things are wrapped up in socio-cultural schema, cognitive schema, prototypical frames, target ideology etc... one cannot simply say, "oh freedom is not rights because it thought about it deeply"

As for the analogy of freedom being a subset of right, obviously this went awry, maybe try thinking deeply about it in the context of how freedom and rights are actually used within the language, culture and behavior, of those using the word.

Freedom is by its very nature a a relativistic word. It is a quality modifier, a state of being expression, applicable in a plethora of situations and completly valid in all of them. From an overprviliedged teen becoming "free from the oppession of my overbearing parents" to At this time I have "the freedom to choose which color of Prius I want." free/freedom is a direct modification/quality descriptor of state of being or implied state of being. It by its very grammatical nature is semantically and situationally relative. This is not even delving inot the affore mentioned series of contextual, and cognitive frames.

Maybe ideas are nothing except the words that are used to convey them.

The words themselves can be ideas.

In reality the consensus is that words and language have some kind of influence on thought; whether they precede thought, whether they form thought, whether thought is absolutely dependent on language etc. is a matter of debate.

Not at all, not by a long stretch. It does not take any individual long to understand the plain difference between the two concepts of freedom and rights. These are simple concepts that we learn at a young age. I think that often times we tend to have a hard time letting things simply be what they are and our philosophy gets bogged down in minutia that hinders our knowledge of understanding.

However, at the same time my answer is partly yes as well. It is true that only through conscious contemplation of concepts that we are able separate ourselves from mindless sheep or any other animal including the human animal. But again it does not take much and yet there are few among us that actively make time every day for consciously contemplating any subject difficult to understand.



This last paragraph is almost my point exactly. Most people use the term freedom when actually they mean a specific right within their culture. However, when pressed I am sure they understand the difference.

---------- Post added 03-29-2010 at 05:42 PM ----------



Were it not the case that ideas only partially exist in the universe you may be right. However, since words are completely dependent on the universe and ideas are not it is not possible that ideas originate from words.

---------- Post added 03-29-2010 at 05:47 PM ----------



Every thing is a combination of both the ideas and objects of creation, including words. Words always convey ideas but are unable to encompass any one idea.

---------- Post added 03-29-2010 at 05:51 PM ----------



It does not make sense that words would precede or form thought. How is that supposed to work? Is there a thread on that?

They lost some particles in CERN. Delay 1 hour.
if words exits in the Univers what means Higgs:lol:

Scientists sure would love to find that higgs boson. Without it all their mathbooks are just as ridiculous as the bible. It is absolutely surprising how many people are devotees of the religion of math.

Inthe hermetic writing there's a part where Hermes wants to sacrifice insence to Thot. Thot stops the son of Hermes with the remarks that's a waste of money and it doesn't help by praying.

Hermes Trimegistus was an adept of Thot and reacted how he had learned around him. Luckily Thot Himself was there to correct him.

U do confuse me. Is it words or Ideas; or both? In Psychology of Law we learned a little. Still lawyers are thought to believe consiness comes before the acts like speech.:bigsmile:

Pepijn Sweep
junior

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Along these lines , what do you make of the opening of the Gospel of John?



"Word" in the original is "logos".

Logos meaning reason.

Yes. Logos also means word, I believe.

To us yes, originally, no.

I think you may be mistaken. I just checked my Greek lexicon and it indicates that logos meant word in classical times. Sorry if you're talking about something else or if I've got it wrong.