the power of words like normalise or weaponise is that they encapsulate an insight into a process.
After the disappointment of Ozma, the National Academy of Science requested a meeting to decide Seti’s future. Invitees included Carl Sagan and the neuroscientist John Lilly, who believed that dolphins had a level of intelligence comparable to that of humans and had been trying to prove it using experiments that involved feeding the dolphins LSD. The group was so impressed with Lilly’s presentation, which promised a more proactive approach to the problem than scanning space for signals, that they called themselves the ‘Order of the Dolphin’ (perhaps Lilly had brought his stash with him).
we/you missed the deadline on this one https://www.dissensus.com/index.php?threads/15491/but werent the lads just saying there has been an uptick in usage and application?
virus is a computer thing too. virus in the simulation.
Heiddegers interest in poetry is along these lines. Vocabulary 'names things into being.' Hubert Dryfus explained it with the language around hippie culture in california delineating the activity of being 'laid back' (his term) and accelerating its increase. Not too different than what Jameson said about the term post modern.Kenner talks about language as an organism in The Pound Era and I recently listened to a clip of Michael S. Judge discussing the Santiago theory of cognition where he piggybacked Kenner/Emerson/Trench/Tooke/Fenollosa and 'fossil poetry' and tried to combine the two,
"Many a single word . . . is itself a concentrated poem, having stores of poetical thought and imagery laid up in it."
-- Richard Chenevix Trench
"... (all poetry) was once in the language itself, and still underlies the dry bones of even our dictionaries... Every word, every metaphor, perhaps several degrees deep, still has the power to flash meaning back and forth between apparently divergent and intractable planes of being. The prehistoric peoples who created language were necessarily poets, since they discovered the whole harmonious framework of the universe and the essential interplay of its living processes. We should find the whole theory of evolution (which our selfcentred Aryan consciousness afterwards forgot) lying concrete in our etymologies."
-- Ernest Fenollosa
Judge's idea's a bit muddled, but the main thrust of it's that what Maturana and Varela refer to as cognition in their theory isn't that different from language, so language is the basic substance of the universe. He also believes thought isn't exclusive to humans and everything, inanimate objects included, thinks and is conscious in some shape or form.
if its to be believed that language is 'living and working intersubjectivity,' than I wouldn't say language was created by us. Rather the construction of language coincided with the construction of the subject. Two mutually supported entities, like a double helix.I currently think of it as more like finance or the internet than something that appeared independently of us like MSJ says. It feels like a creation of ours that's gotten out of control and taken on a life of its own. That being said, it begs the question: Where did the idea come from to create it in the first place? Did it insert itself into us so that we would help it thrive? Maybe it's like what Land says about Capital coming from the future to assemble itself from the resources of the past.
If you think about how many conflicts and issues have occurred as a result of language/miscommunication then the idea that language might be an opponent working to undermine us is quite unsettling.